Did LBJ hate MLK, Got proof.
I thought LBJ had nothing but compassion for Blacks?
Category Archives: Opinion
Did LBJ hate MLK, Got proof.
If any of you have taken Dave Ramsey’s financial classes you know he uses an “envelope system” to help you budget and save money. You can easily see where money is being spent, how it’s growing or dwindling, and so on.
The government can’t make envelopes that big, so we talk in terms of buckets. Based on the way they spend money, it’s obvious they don’t just think we have buckets full, we must have skip loaders full!
We all know about the basic “buckets”…
Military, health and welfare, education, and a few others. For those of you who really don’t get it, the government does not make “revenue,” they collect taxes. Or in plain, simple English, they take your money!
I don’t have a real problem paying taxes. I don’t want to do it, but I do understand the need to pay taxes for the basics like first responders (fire, police, ambulance), military, “basic” healthcare (hospitals and clinics), road work and maintenance (in the form of tire or gas taxes), snow removal, landslide removal, you get the picture. Paying basic taxes for services received.
But, I don’t want to fund the government’s stupidity and inability to spend money wisely. Enter the Progressive Left. Who made the noise when we were paying $90 for a toilet seat and $300 for hammers? (Republicans.) When we paid that EPA employee for 8 years who never showed up for work? (Republicans.) And what about the millions of dollars in new buildings for government workers when we have numerous empty ones that we aren’t even renting out? (Republicans.) When can I scream for you to simply stop wasting money?
I keep hearing from the Left how the “rich” can afford to pay more, when, in reality, they are already paying more percentage-wise of their income than the 99%-ers. Why? They made better decisions, took greater risk, and, therefore, made more money. Guess what? A majority of those “rich people” are Democrats!
Democrats keep saying rich people should pay more taxes, but where is their money? The Dems have some of the richest congressmen on The Hill (they don’t all arrive rich, but most leave rich!) They keep talking about closing tax loopholes, but what bill has Pelosi, Reid, or Feinstein put on the table that will close the loopholes that they themselves take advantage of? None!
Mr. Obama is going to come out on Tuesday telling us all the good things he has done and how everything is going to be butterflies and rainbows. Unemployment is at 5.6%, however, we have 1 million less full-time workers today than when he took office! We have less worker participation than when he took office. There’s not enough money in the unemployment and disability buckets (now being funded by these new part-time taxpayers). They’ll say the government is paying the shortage, but we are the government, so taxpayers are paying for it!
He is going to tell us how families can now afford health insurance thanks to the Affordable Care Act, and for the first time in history many families have insurance who couldn’t get it before! Another program carried on the backs of the taxpayer through the HHS tax bucket. Many of these policies are subsidized by the government, sorry, I mean taxpayers… all those new part-time taxpayers. Many families lost their health insurance and had to go to a substandard health policy with longer wait periods and longer drives for people to see their doctors and get help. Additionally, they now have larger deductibles. And let’s just get past all that “You can keep your doctor” BS and discuss how he said that it would “cost you less than the average cell phone bill” but then switched to “you will need to tighten your budget and cut out some things you don’t have to have.” Instead of saving the average family $2500 a year, it will end up costing the average family about $5000 a year. That’s the projections from the CBO, not TRS!
He’s also going to tell us that families will have a chance to save money and get ahead and realize the American dream and own a home. In reality, home ownership is down from when he took office by 3%, median income is down, many people working part-time instead of full-time jobs, the poverty level has increased, and people on food stamps have almost doubled. This government subsidized programs are paid from the welfare bucket! Apparently, in the President’s world, having less somehow translates into a better chance of realizing the American dream!
He’ll say “The Market is doing great!” How about we pull the $85 billion a month the government is using in the prop-up-the-market bucket (more taxpayer money going down the drain), and see what the market really looks like?
He’ll say gas is at an all-time low (as if he deliberately had a hand in making it happen). I doubt he’ll issue a big “shout out” and “thank you” to ISIS. If you want to thank Obama for this I suppose you can. His inactivity in squelching the “JV team” known as ISIS
Read more at TRS
If you think king Obama has been a tyrant for the past six years, wait until you see his last two years in office. Obama has tried and tried to push his big government agenda on the American people, thankfully the Supreme Court has slapped him down 13 times, but that doesn’t stop him. We can expect more executive actions and even more boldness from Obama trying to do everything he can to harm this country.
If you need proof of what a danger this president is, on Wednesday the 14th in the dead of night, the Department of Defense announced that five Yemeni terror suspects held at Guantanamo Bay have been released. But despite concerns from lawmakers about the risks of sending anybody back to Yemen, four were released to Oman which is right next door. With the world just coming off the terror attack in France and the up tick in terror threats, not to mention all the be-headings, Obama releases enemy combatants back into the fight and rest assured, they will be taking up arms against America.
Is there any common sense to releasing the enemy back into the battle field? Obama has pushed to close the detention facility since his inauguration in 2009 and you can bet he will try to make it happen before he leaves office, no matter how many killers he gives back to the enemy. Now is not the time to be emptying Guantanamo, especially if you are putting these terrorists back into the fight.
Sometimes you have to wonder whose side is Obama really on; his pledge to close Gitmo overrides the safety of the American people. He is bending over backwards to close a nuclear deal with Iran, he wants it to be part of his legacy, but letting Iran build a nuclear weapon makes the world less safe. He has drawn red line after red line and has let our enemies slap him in the face by disregarding what he says. He even refuses to admit that there is a war on terror, calling some terror attacks, “Work place violence.”
Obama has over burdened this country with regulations that has prevented the economy from growing, 64% of Americans still feel like we are in a recession. Federal agencies issued 3,659 final rules in 2013, and some 3,415 regulations for 2014, funny how he releases them late on a Friday or right before a major holiday. What about executive orders, he says he has issued less than the previous president, but Obama has issued 195 executive orders. Published alongside them in the Federal Register are 198 presidential memoranda, all of which carry the same legal force as executive orders. The president reportedly vowed Thursday to press ahead with more executive actions, despite a veritable uprising from congressional Republicans over that strategy. Where is the most transparent president we were promised.
Those who still support this president are living life with their heads in the sand; the harm this president has done will take many years to undo. But what scares me most is the next two years. The president, who already has issued a string of veto threats in the opening days of the 114th Congress, indicated he’s prepared to keep opposing legislation he finds objectionable. This is from a man who said he is willing to work with anyone to pass legislation, yea, and Obama-Care is going to lower costs, give me a break.
A national poll finds that majorities of American voters think the Obama administration has mostly failed at handling illegal immigration, improving the country’s image around the world, handling race relations, improving health care and growing the economy. Watch out for the next two years, because Obama has nothing to lose, but the American people do.
“What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids” Available here.
The recent reelection of John Boehner as Speaker of the House brought to light a disturbing trait among some who self-identify as “conservatives.” Boehner has been perceived as a thorn in the side of conservative interests since his first election four years ago, as he has continually acquiesced, or as some say it, “caved” to the left in his chamber, and to the president. The sentiment is captured in a landmark political cartoon showing an elephant reaching across a dangerous precipice toward an indifferent president, titled merely, “The Compromise.”
The sentiment is understandable, and shared by nearly all of us on the right of the political spectrum. But what was disturbing was the reaction of some toward their own congressmen who supported Boehner.
Raul Labrador (R-ID) won reelection from Idaho’s 1st Congressional District in November and is as steeped in his conservative ideals, and the classical liberal precepts the country was founded upon, as any conservative in Congress. There can be no question that his loyalties lie with the Constitution, the enumerated powers of the federal government, and the rights ostensibly assured thereby.
But after it became known publicly that Labrador had voted for the Speaker, an outpouring of obstreperous denunciations ensued. Comments on Labrador’s Facebook wall accused him of being a traitor, a turncoat, of betraying his conservative values, and betraying all conservatives who voted for him. Many declared they would never support him again, while others called for his recall.
Anyone with a modicum of political savvy, knows, or at least should know, that our chosen candidates, and elected officials, are not always going to vote the way we want them to, or the way we would if we were there. But the very notion of removing, or refusing to vote again for, the congressman because of one vote, even though he may a Freedomworks conservative rating of 90, on a 0-100 scale, is nothing short of idiocy.
This is a dangerous mentality that seems to be common at extremes of any ideology. “Unless you agree completely with me, or refuse to vote precisely the way I would have you vote, I’m not going to support you.” The only way to assure that your representative votes precisely as you want them to is to hold that position yourself. No one sees issues and solutions precisely the same way, except perhaps pure ideologues.
The derision heaped upon Labrador for his Speaker vote is a perfect example of how illogically and ideologically rigid some can be. Labrador’s conservatism is indisputable, and yet because of one vote, he’s called every pejorative epithet in the book, and many who share his ideological orientation throw him under the bus. This is where the ignorance of governance is so blatantly manifest. A viable educational tool might be to consider what other forms of extremism employ the same tactic that ostracizes and divides based on ideological “purity.”
A critical component to our efforts in working together in this democratic experiment is the didactic process of refining tactics based on efficacy. That includes identifying the destructive tactics that preclude the very notion of compromise, (which is essential in a constitutional republic), and contribute to the increased polarization of the body politic. This is clearly one of the most detrimental tactics; when we are so rigid in our ideological convictions that we destroy the relationship shared with others who think mostly as we do. It’s destructive to the political process, and its nascence and impetus, is based in ideological rigidity.
It’s also a tactic of some on the left, as superbly promulgated by Saul Alinsky. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Conservatives should realize that the consequences of implementing the tactic on themselves vitiates the advantages of a conservative voting block by dividing and parsing tranches based on perceived fealty to our founding principles. The result basically culls the “nonbelievers” from the “believers,” by lashing out, maligning, and condemning those who are perceived to not agree entirely, essentially ostracizing those who should be our allies.
It should be disturbing to conservatives when they learn that they employ the same tactic as other extremists, but many seem to revel in it, as if it’s a badge of honor of how “conservative” they are. That’s not a measure of political ideological integrity – it’s a measure of political ignorance of how the system works and how we have to work together in this republic of ours.
We should express our disapprobation to our elected officials when we disagree. But it’s totally illogical, and self-destructive, when we marginalize and alienate those with whom we share values, but may differ occasionally on specific votes. There aren’t many affirming or positive adjectives that can be used to describe someone who can only be supportive of, or civil to, someone with whom they agree 100% of the time.
If conservatives continue these tactics, they will succeed only in splintering and dividing themselves, granting the left victory after victory at the polls. It’s so often quoted that I hesitate to say it again, but apparently some need the continual reminder. As Ronald Reagan once said, “He who agrees with me 80% of the time is not my enemy.” Or his variation on that theme, “My eighty-percent friend is not my twenty-percent enemy.”
Politico reports, Obama is going shock-and-awe to stop the popularly-elected Congress:
According to several sources at the Thursday summit in Baltimore, Obama vowed to defend his agenda against Republicans in Congress, promised to stand firm against GOP efforts to dismantle his agenda and called on his Democratic colleagues to help sustain his expected vetoes. The president also was explicit over his administration’s opposition to an Iran sanctions bill, promising to veto legislation with his administration in the midst of multilateral nuclear negotiations with the Middle Eastern regime.
This President has nothing to lose. As a second-term, lame-duck and largely unpopular leader has no political capital, prestige or honor left to give up. He cannot be re-elected, no Democrat wants them on their campaign stops and every leader in Congress that supported his agenda is… no longer a leader (R.I.P Harry and Nancy.)
The difficulty the President faces is that many other re-electable Democrats don’t actually agree with him. It would seem that about 40% of Democrats support the Keystone XL Pipeline and moderate Dems are ready to bump heads with the lame-duck President:
Centrist Democrats have criticized President Obama for the time it has taken to review the project, and are trying to pass legislation to approve Keystone XL.
These Democrats are in-danger of losing their seats as their constituents face real day-to-day costs like gas and groceries. Obama’s policies have done nothing to help them and the President’s new obstructionist stance just infuriates those already tired of the inability of Washington to do much of anything.
The President of change and working together is now the President of “My way or the highway.” Then again.. hasn’t he always?
Over the weekend I did some food shopping, I like to go to Wal-Mart because you can’t beat the prices. I do a large part of my shopping at Wal-Mart, and then I finish up at the local supermarket, which is called Publix. The other day I noticed something I hadn’t noticed before, the difference in the workers between the two stores.
In Publix the workers were dressed nicer, more courteous, friendlier, and more helpful. In Wal-Mart when I asked for help, I got a look that said, what are you bothering me for, plus, I could never do a complete shopping because the shelves are never fully stocked. I’m not saying that everyone was like that, there were friendly people there, people with smiles, but it was enough to make me take notice.
As I was driving home, it dawned on me that these were the same people who were protesting all over the country for a $20 minimum wage, well let me tell you something, some of the people I have seen do not even deserve the money they are making now. Does anyone think that by paying someone more money that it is going to make them better workers? I don’t think so. Call me old fashioned, but I think a person should be paid what they are worth, not what the government thinks they should be paid. The old way was first show me how good of a worker you are, then you get the raise, not get the raise and hope you are a good worker.
I have never been a fan of a minimum wage, the idea that the government can tell a business owner what they have to pay an employee does not sit well with me. It seems that this government is bent on destroying the American spirit, working hard to move up the ladder does not seem important any more, in a land where the government wants to hand everything to you at the start, only takes away the motivation of the individual.
It’s great if everyone would make $50,000 a year, live in a nice house and have a new car in the driveway, but where is the feeling of accomplishment? I had my first job when I was 14, I worked for a dry cleaner delivering clothes for $25 a week, plus tips, on a good week I would make $35. The feeling of pride I would have every Friday when the owner would open up the cash register and hand me two tens and a five is something I can’t explain, but it was a good feeling. It wasn’t that easy of a job as you might think. I had to deliver in the rain and snow, I was like the mailman, I delivered in any type of weather.
If you can stock 5 shelves an hour making $8 an hour, but now I turn around and pay you $20 an hour and you are still stocking 5 shelves an hour, where is the justification for that, I am getting nothing more for that extra $12 an hour you are being paid. Should a person be paid $15 an hour to hand me a sack of burgers at McDonalds? I don’t think so.
The free-market should be taking care of this, we used to have one in this country, but it is slowly slipping away. We should find a way to put all workers on commission that is the only way you can find out what a person is truly worth.
“What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids” Available here.
Did that get your attention? First, let me say Happy New Year! I hope you had a great Christmas and holiday season and that you have come back to reality and the rhythm of life whole and healthy.
I’ve been on vacation for a few weeks. And while it was more like dropping off social media and the web for a while than actually going on vacation, it was just good to have some down time.
Unfortunately, the PC police and the Hard Left Loons didn’t take a day, or even an hour, off. They were and still are out in full force.
The first day back I ran a piece about preachers in Canada being arrested for simply teaching Biblical principles as it pertains to homosexuality. There was nothing about hating the person. No comments about beheading the person. No comments about stoning the person. No reference to acting out in a violent way against anyone in the LGBTQ community. They were simply teaching what God said about homosexuality according to the Bible.
Yet that is considered “hate speech” because it calls the actions of another human being sin.
Well, first I have to say, if you don’t believe in God, then you don’t believe in sin. So why are you upset? Next I would ask, how is it hate speech to say the actions of a person are against God?
Is it hate speech if I say I don’t like Mexican food? It gives me bad gas and I really just don’t like it. Does that mean I hate Mexicans? Because I think the Mexican border should be secured and people should come here legally, does that mean I hate Mexicans? How petty of you to think that I want the border secured to keep out Mexicans when it’s been proven that people from all over the world come over the border illegally.
I posted the statement on social media “It’s already happening in Canada, pastors being arrested for preaching against homosexuality.” A follower named Chris responded after I asked people to define “hate speech.” I got the usual “low IQ” responses; “anything that comes out of your mouth,” “anything a Republican says,” “anything a conservative says” and so on. But at least Chris took an honest stab at it… well, as honest as a left-leaning progressive can.
“hate speech is anything that incites violence … also specifically its hate speech when you do things like compare gays to pedophiles and people who have sex with animals.
“…if they weren’t producing hate speech there would be no problems.”
Well, I have never heard any preacher (except the right Reverend Al Sharpton) advocate violence. Inciting violence in today’s society is easy. Make fun of someone’s baseball team in the parking lot after a game and you might get your head bashed in and end up in a coma (like what happened at a Los Angeles Dodgers game a few years back). Were the attackers charged with hate crimes? No!
A liberal professor tore up an “anti-abortion” display on campus while calling the young men and woman there all kinds of names. Was she brought up on hate charges? Nope!
So, in all honesty, he should have said when a “conservative religious type” says something that offends, they should be brought up on hate speech charges.
Webster’s says, Pedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger. Not Joe’s definition. So are you saying that no gays or lesbians are pedophiles? And if that is what you’re saying, would you say the same about heterosexuals? Or do the same rules not apply?
This is classic, “…if they weren’t producing hate speech there would be no problems.” Where do we live in “Who-Ville” where we all eat rainbows and poop butterflies?
Wake up! Someone, somewhere will always be offended by something someone somewhere says. Why? Because they choose to be offended and intolerant!
What Left-logic says is that if I don’t accept the way you want to live, the things you want to do, and your belief system over mine, then I’m a hater. Period!
If I believe that abortion is wrong and that you actually take a human life, I’m a woman hater. If I don’t believe in same sex marriage, I hate same sex couples.
According to Left-logic I hate my children. And so did many of you reading this. I have promised the kids I would not give away their deep dark secrets, and I won’t. But, when one was dabbling in drugs I told them I wouldn’t support them. I even had them arrested for having drugs on them. OMG where is child protective services when you need them? According to Left-logic, ……
Read more at” TheRealSide
The contortions to which those in the Obama Administration will submit themselves in order to avoid calling Islamist terrorism just that would be comedic if the subject matter weren’t so deadly serious. Case in point comes to us in an announcement by the White House that a “summit on how to counter violent extremism” will be held next month amid fears amongst the American populace that Islamist terror attacks on US soil are all but certain.
The Washington Times reports:
“The White House on Sunday announced it will host a summit next month on how to counter violent extremism amid renewed fears among Americans that terror attacks on the homeland are inevitable.
“A Rasmussen poll released Sunday shows that 65 percent of Americans believe it is at least somewhat likely an attack ‘on those critical of Islam’ in the US will occur over the next year. Just 26 percent said such an attack is not likely, the survey shows…
“‘The [ani-extremism] summit will include representatives from a number of partner nations, focusing on the themes of community engagement, religious leader engagement, and the role of the private sector and tech community,’ White House press secretary Josh Earnest said in a statement Sunday. ‘Through presentations, panel discussions, and small group interactions, participants will build on local, state, and federal government; community; and international efforts to better understand, identify, and prevent the cycle of radicalization to violence at home in the United States and abroad.’”
Missing in this grand overture was the words “Islamist” and “terrorism”. Go figure.
The Rasmussen poll cited as the catalyst for this “summit” (as Mr. Obama would say, “Just words. Just speeches…”) centered on the American population’s concern about terror groups executing attacks on institutions of free speech here in the United States. It didn’t ask about “extremist groups,” which the Obama Administration has bastardized to include TEA Party groups and Second Amendment groups. It focused solely on Islamist terrorism, period. But, as then Obama Chief-of-Staff Rahm Emanuel famously (or infamously) said, one should never let a good crisis go to waste. So, the Obama Administration widens the focus area from Islamist terrorism to “extremism” providing a wider blanket of topic coverage, and purely for political gain. It is sickeningly disingenuous.
It is sad, really, that the American people possess the courage to call Islamist terrorism what it is, even as their elected President bobs-and-weaves to avoid even using the terminology, all the while conniving, manipulating and distorting the issue at hand to affect marginalization of his political foes. His actions are not only beneath the dignity of his office and a stain on American history, they are a harsh and wicked slap in the face to everyone affected by Islamist terrorism, and especially those affected by the slaughter at Charlie Hebdo and the people of France, America’s oldest ally.
I would identify Mr. Obama as a coward for his refusal to state the obvious where Islamist terrorism is concerned. But I fear his motives are much more nefarious that cowardice. They are political. I don’t really know which is worse.
Masked gunman stormed the offices of a satirical French magazine, Charlie Hebdo (The Weekly Charlie), and slaughtered 12 people in cold blood. Their perceived “crime” was to have published caricatures of Muhammad. And let’s be clear, this was no act of the deranged. The terrorist gunmen were heard screaming, “Allahu Akbar” as they shot, with one assailant shouting, “The Prophet has been avenged,” as they escaped the scene. This was a terrorist act carried out by ideological barbarians over a cartoon.
Aside from the deadly serious problem Islamists have with invoking violence at every turn – in protest, in conquest, in celebration of their “religion” – this incident stands as a pointed reminder that Islamists purposefully calculate these murderous actions; plotting them meticulously down to the second. But even in the perfection of their plans one thing is always a constant for the Islamist. They are willing to wait a lifetime to affect the moment, a concept antithetical to the Western “sitcom attention span” culture. To wit, the management of Charlie Hebdo was first warned of reprisals for their publishing of the Muhammad cartoons eight years ago.
As Daesh (the Islamic State) continues its conquest of the Middles East – leaving fathers crucified and dismembered, mothers sold into slavery or used as concubines and children’s heads left on pikes as warnings against any refusal of subjugation, Yemeni suicide bombers kill scores each day. As Boko Haram kidnaps, rapes and slaughters Christian girls in Africa, axe wielding “lone wolf” Islamists slash people on subway platforms in New York and “home grown” terrorists are routinely thwarted in their murderous plans, but for the grace of God, by law enforcement around the world. Myriad evidence is provided every day that the Islamic ideology has a potent, malignant and metastasizing cancer for which the patient itself must seek treatment. Yet, but for a very few brave voices, the Islamic community does nothing to address the problem. There is no defense for their inaction or their deafening silence.
One excuse given for Muslim inaction – and “excuse” is an accurate portrayal of the abdication of responsibility practiced by many Muslims around the world, is that the Quran is the literal word of Allah; scripture from which deviation is forbidden. Of course, this contention is absurd for the fact that Muhammad was not literate – he could not read nor write:
“According to the traditional narrative, several companions of Muhammad served as scribes and were responsible for writing down the revelations. Shortly after Muhammad’s death, the Quran was compiled by his companions who wrote down and memorized parts of it. These codices had differences that motivated the Caliph Uthman to establish a standard version now known as Uthman’s codex, which is generally considered the archetype of the Quran we have today. However, the existence of variant readings, with mostly minor and some significant variations, and the early unvocalized Arabic script mean the relationship between Uthman’s codex to both the text of today’s Quran and to the revelations of Muhammad’s time is still unclear.”
For an edict to be literal the transcription can have no variance between versions; no competing narratives. By virtue of the competing narratives between Muhammad’s scribes, and even the Uthman’s codex, the “literal word of Allah,” narrative stands as a patently false one. Yet, the excuse emanating from the Muslim community remains. The facts don’t matter.
It is well past time that true leaders within the Islamic community emerge to brave the slings and arrows – or more accurately the suicide bombings and beheadings – of the Islamist fanatics in order to affect a radical and historical transformation of their beliefs; a reformation of Islam. This reformation can only commence from within the Islamic community for the movement to have any legitimacy.
The declaration of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi calling for a “religious revolution” within Islam is a promising event. And the work of people like Dr. Zuhdi Jasser and Dr. Walid Phares to motivate and educate is noble. But until rank and file Muslims take to the streets by the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, around the world in protest; until Muslims of every class, sect and faction start rooting out the violent amongst them for punishment and ridicule; until the Muslim community itself starts teaching their children – all over the world – that martyrdom and violent jihad send them to Hell and not to virgins, nothing will change. Islamist conquest will continue. Innocent blood will continue to run in the streets. Liberty and freedom will continue to be denied.
As we contemplate the slaughter in France – a slaughter that happened in the name of Muhammad and because of a cartoon, let’s also contemplate the concept of “enough.” We, as a people emanating from the free world, must say, “enough.” No more excuses. No more “religion of peace.” Enough. Enough.
I am sure everyone has heard the name Glenn Beck. Some love him, some hate him, some like him, some say eh. I have been a fan of Glenn Beck since he had a show on the Fox channel at 5pm, do I agree with everything he says, no, but I think most things I do. Many on the Left call him a nut job, wacko, the evil prince of America, shit for brains and a lot of other things, but that’s what I think of the people on the Left, so I guess it all evens out.
Mr. Beck has a tremendous comeback story, losing everything, and I mean everything to drugs and alcohol, he now is a bestselling author and is a big shot mogul of an entertainment empire. I love comeback stories, having come through one myself, not anything compared to Mr. Beck’s, but anyone who picks themselves up from failure I love to read about.
One of Mr. Beck’s many projects is The Restoring America Project; it is something that is needed in this country without a doubt. Our schools don’t teach history like they did when I was a kid, oh sure they teach it, but when I went to school they taught how great America was, now, that’s if they teach it at all, they show America as a bad country, even calling the Pilgrims who settled at Plymouth Rock, the first American terrorists.
Mr. Beck remembers the 1950’s, as I do, when Walt Disney would put out movies and TV shows such as Davy Crockett, Daniel Boone, The Alamo and many other heroes from our past. Our kids today don’t see shows like this anymore, if they do, they are portrayed as villains, that’s if they even know who any of them are. All the heroes I knew growing up, seem to have vanished from the face of the earth and have been replaced with the new heroes for our children to admire, the sports figure who beats up women, does drugs, or the Hip-Hop artists who glorify using and dealing drugs, killing cops, raping women.
You might disagree with everything Mr. Beck says, but how can you disagree with him on this subject? Our children have to learn the greatness of America, if they don’t, why should they care about a country if it is an evil place, why would they defend it or fight for it like so many have done in the past?
Mr. Beck did not solicit or pay me to write this article, I just believe it is a very important issue. There is an old saying that “Our children are our future,” from where I sit, our future is not looking all that bright. When we have a generation of people who can’t tell you who fought in the Civil War, or who won, and don’t know which country we won our independence from, that is not a good sign. I used to think it was funny when they would show the “man in the street” scenes, asking kids questions like these, now not so much.
As far as Mr. Beck being the savior of America, well I just wrote that to get your attention. But if he accomplishes what he is setting out to do, who knows. (Except he needs to stop crying so much.)
I know I’ll get hate mail from the Beck bashers for this article, but they can go have intercourse with themselves.
“What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids” Available here.
This is one man’s opinion.
While recently rereading a classical literary piece from a century ago, I realized anew how each person is a microcosm of the demographic group or society to which he or she belongs. Truly, no man is an island, and we all bring to our society characteristics, traits, and attributes which contribute to the whole. When we analyze some of the notable events from the past year, we can’t help but realize how our individual contributions either ameliorate, or vitiate, the cumulative character of our society.
The book, As a Man Thinketh, by the English moralist James Allen, abounds in insightful truisms and verities. The following is but one of many such gems. “A man’s mind may be likened to a garden, which may be intelligently cultivated or allowed to run wild; but whether cultivated or neglected, it must, and will, bring forth. If no useful seeds are put into it, then an abundance of useless weed seeds will fall therein, and will continue to produce their kind.”
As much idiocy as we observed playing out on the public stage this past year, it’s obvious that there are too many minds not being planted or cultivated with ennobling or productive seeds. And, according to Allen, the evidence is manifest behaviorally. Not unlike the timeless wisdom of Forrest Gump, “Stupid is as stupid does.”
Case in point, the “Hands up, don’t shoot,” social phenomenon that was spawned, and perpetuated, based on fictitious accounts of the tragic shooting of a young man in Ferguson, MO. The fact that such a fallacious mantra would gain such traction among the race-baiters, celebrities, misinformed, and even professional athletes, does not portend well for our culture. But why bother with facts and evidence, when a fabricated story can be so superbly spun for the sake of advancing an ideological narrative, or inciting riots and precipitating violence? This provides evidentiary validation of Allen’s thesis, that “an abundance of useless weed seeds” can bear sway in the absence of “useful,” and I might add, informed and fact-based “seeds.”
On a par with that evidentiary validation, but much more consequential in its long-term implications, is the request by law students at Columbia, Harvard, and other law schools, to postpone their final exams. They felt they had been “traumatized” due to their protests of the Ferguson and New York grand jury decisions to not charge policemen for perceived wrongful deaths. Would anyone even consider hiring an attorney who felt “traumatized” because they protested too strenuously, and felt themselves to be incapable of taking tests as a result? Aphorisms aplenty seem to apply in such an instance, primary of which is simply to “grow up.”
As we celebrated the 50th anniversary of the Great Society “war on poverty,” the nation’s redistribution of over $22 trillion is one of those governmental policies that evokes great emotion yet, as inefficacious as it has been, clearly is bourn of ideological “weeds.” Our poverty rate is about the same today as it was fifty years ago, which means our wealth redistribution has accomplished nothing, and has not addressed the underlying societal issues which are causal to poverty.
Another example is regrettably provided by our president, who, after claiming that all of his policies were on the midterm electoral ballot, was thoroughly trounced as voters rejected his legislative and ideological pawns who supported his policies. Yet, in the aftermath of such a drubbing, became increasingly pertinacious, clinging to his rejected ideology, and claimed to hear what those who didn’t vote had to say. The mainstream media should have had a heyday with such vapidity, yet, as has been their wont over the past six years, gave the president a pass on his vacuity.
Equally vacuous was the president’s reference to the Biblical story of Mary and Joseph in an amnesty speech delivered last month. He may want to break down and actually read the Bible, if he’s going to “quote” from it. Mary and Joseph were not illegal aliens, and, contrary to his other “quote” from the Bible in the same speech, the Good Book says nothing about “people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.” It’s bad enough when our fellow countrymen fill their ignorant voids with uninformed “weeds,” but when our president does it, and he gets away with it, it does not bode well for our media or our society.
That such ignorance, bourn of ideological “weeds,” can flourish in our “enlightened” culture is indeed discomfiting. It’s enough to make one wonder if “The Walking Dead” TV series is more reflective of our collective consciousness, rather than simply apocalyptic TV fiction.
I could not believe the headline I just read. “Obama says US less racially divided since he took office.” Do we have a commander in chief that is brain dead? Is he ignoring what is going on in this country? Or is he doing what he does best, lying to the American people to protect his own ass?
How can anyone in this country think that race relations are better off now? Obama has divided this country more than it has ever been. Obama said, “I actually think that it’s probably, in its day-to-day interactions, less racially divided.” A Bloomberg Politics survey out this month found a majority of Americans – 53 percent – feel interactions between white and black communities have deteriorated since Obama took office. He knows what he is doing. He came into office to divide. No one is going to tell me any different.
Obama has not only lost respect in this country, but around the world as well. “Obama always goes reckless in words and deeds like a monkey in a tropical forest,” said the North Koreans. It wasn’t the first time North Korea has used crude insults against Obama”s administration. Earlier this year the North Koreans called U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry a wolf with a “hideous” lantern jaw. In May, North Korea’s news agency published a dispatch saying Obama has the “shape of a monkey.”
How long will the American people put up with a president like this? With an approval rating at 36%, I guess not long. This country has been falling apart for the past six years, more than I have ever seen it, and I lived through the 60’s when I thought this country was really falling apart. We need a uniter, not dividers, as long as the Democratic Party is in office we will never see a united country. We have in Obama and Holder, the two biggest dividers, Speaking of Holder, if there was ever a racist, it is him.
The America that I used to know is no longer, and I am not the only who feels that way. Can we get it back? Yes, if we get another Reagan, a man who spoke of the greatness of America, for the greatness of America, not a division of America, which Obama has constantly done. All anyone has to do is look at the speeches Obama has given to see how he has divided our country, how he dislikes this country. Once Obama is gone, and his crony Holder is gone, America will get back to greatness, hopefully, Not only here, but around the world. There was once a feeling that America was great. That disappeared 6 years ago. We have not yet felt the destruction Obama has done. In the coming years, we will see.
“What Kind Of America Are We Leaving Our Kids” Available here.
This is one man’s opinion.
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.
“What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids” Available here.
“I’m offended every time I hear a Christmas Carol, or see a nativity scene, or see a cross, especially if it’s all lit up. Even the Santa Claus and decorations bug me because I know that it all has to do with Christmas.” Such was the comment made on a California radio talk show a few years ago, by a fellow who chose to take offense at the season, rather than look for the good.
It really is disconcerting that there are some who suffer great angst over a national holiday that is intended to acknowledge not just the birth of Jesus Christ, but our humanity and commonality.
Calvin Coolidge said, “Christmas is not a time nor a season, but a state of mind. To cherish peace and goodwill, to be plenteous in mercy, is to have the real spirit of Christmas.” When explicated in those terms it’s hard to imagine anyone taking umbrage at the celebration of Christmas.
Some are quick to take offense at various elements of our culture, and this time of year such relapses seem to increase significantly. Confucius is credited with saying, “He who takes offense when none is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a bigger fool.”
That seems appropriate consideration for any who take offense at what is not intended to offend. Some, like the aforementioned caller, take offense from displays like nativity scenes or menorahs, appellations like “Christmas Trees,” or greetings like “Merry Christmas,” and even music that may make reference to He whose birthday we celebrate as a national holiday. No offense is intended, but a free and open expression of anything with a hint at religiosity creates an anxiety for some even as our celebration of Christmas continues to morph into more of a secular celebration.
Each of us determines for ourselves whether we will be offended. And it’s not just about Christmas or religious expression; it’s about everything in life. When we are offended, we’re making a conscious decision to grant someone else control over our attitude. If we allow others to offend us, whether intentional or otherwise, we sacrifice control of our attitudes to someone else.
Contrast those who are so quick to take offense at the drop of a “Merry Christmas,” with an atheist philosophy professor I had an ongoing discussion with on a blog a couple years ago. After commending him for wishing readers “Merry Christmas,” he responded back, “By the way, if there’s a ‘war on Christmas,’ I’m not part of it. It’s fine with me if people want to put a manger scene in front of City Hall. Being an atheist doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy holidays and traditions.” What a healthy, mature, and tolerant attitude! He obviously has learned the great lesson of life that he can choose to be offended or not, it’s strictly voluntary, and that going through life with a chip on his shoulder, just waiting for someone to knock it off, is no way to live.
I appreciate Coolidge’s perspective on Christmas, for certainly there is an increase in sensitivity to others at this time of year in spite of the often-hectic schedules we maintain as we shop for just the right gift for each of our loved ones. But the foundational motivations for finding that gift are love and gratitude. That principle of love can and should be shared by all people, not just this time of year, but throughout the year. If there were a way of packaging this spirit of love and sharing that as our gift to everyone, think how much better the world would be. Surely, most of the world’s problems could be solved.
Charles Dickens, in 1843, penned the now immortal “A Christmas Carol,” that played a significant role in making of our Christmas observance the overt celebration that it is today. But it was also instrumental in transforming a holiday from one disavowed by many Christian sects because of its communal hedonistic excess to one of personal goodwill and compassion. If one man can, through his creativity and power of communication, do so much to transform Western holiday observance, how can we deny the potential of each of us, within our spheres of influence, to create such a transformation of our Christmas observance?
Surely we can each be “Dickens” in our homes, neighborhoods, and communities, by redoubling our focus on the charity that is at the heart of our observance. Surely we can, through our individual acts of kindness, and increase in sensitivity, mollify the malcontents, touch the lives of those who may think they are forgotten or unappreciated in our society, and somehow ameliorate the temporal conditions of those who may have less than we.
Said Dickens of Ebenezer Scrooge, “…he knew how to keep Christmas well, if any man alive possessed the knowledge. May that be truly said of us, and all of us.” A fitting end for his tome, and a noble goal for each of us.
Regardless of your theological beliefs, may the spirit of Christmas fill your home, so you can find joy in extending charity, service, and heart-felt comfort in reaching out to the lonely and the needy. Even the secularists amongst us would be hard pressed to criticize our observance of Christmas if it translated to such universal, humanistic altruism, which is what He whose birthday we celebrate would desire of us. To each of you, Merry Christmas, in the full, inclusive context of all the good that Christmas represents.
Our soldiers are the defenders of our freedom, they protect us from enemies foreign and domestic, and without them there would be no America. So why does it seem that our very own government are turning their backs on these hero’s?
In the news recently, was a story about one of our soldiers, a former Army lieutenant sentenced to 20 years in Leavenworth for ordering his men to shoot three civilians in Afghanistan. Lt. Clint Lorance, 29, was convicted of murder in the 2012 incident, in which he ordered his platoon to shoot the men approaching a checkpoint on a motorcycle when they refused to stop. Two died, and military prosecutors at Lorance’s court martial said he acted recklessly in violation of the military’s rules of engagement, which requires soldiers to hold fire absent evidence of hostile action or hostile intent.
Hostile action or intent? There is a war in Afghanistan, suicide bombers are an every day thing. Maybe my thinking is a little screwed-up, but if you are running a check point in a war zone and unknown men are approaching on a motorcycle and refuse an order to stop, there is a good possibility that they might be unfriendly people, shooting them seems like the logical thing to do.
Did the government railroad this hero? “The Army has in its possession evidence linking Afghan military-aged males involved in this general court-martial to improvised explosive devices as well as IED attacks and terror networks in Afghanistan,” reads a memo from Lorance’s attorneys. “The government failed to disclose this information to the chain-of-command, counsel for the defense, and the court-martial. These significant failures strike at the very heart of American due process and show that the government violated its discovery and disclosure obligations.”
Let’s add this to the list of how the government mistreats our soldiers, along with the VA scandal, where soldiers were left dying waiting for treatment in the hands of managers who were only interested in getting bigger bonuses instead of treating our hero’s. Let’s not forget the Fort Hood shootings, where the Obama administration refused to call it a terrorist attack and denied those soldiers due compensation.
Lt. Clint Lorance is a hero, not a criminal; he saw what he perceived to be the enemy when he ordered his men to shoot and rightly so. The old saying that war is hell is true; things don’t always go the way they are supposed too. Imprisoning a soldier for doing what he thought he had to do to save his men, is a great miscarriage of justice, if it were me, I’d pin a medal on his chest.
“What Kind Of Society Are We Leaving Our Kids” Available here.
This is one man’s opinion.