Skip to content


HUMILITY: LEADING BY FOLLOWING, A PRESCRIPTION FOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

The greatest presidents in American history had one trait in common more than any other, humility. The point could be argued that their public personas were far different than the realities of their characters, that in fact a monumental ego has always been an equally necessary characteristic in powerful men however subordinated contemporaneously by their handlers and in the various chronicles detailing their lives and actions after they’ve gone. And yet, the latter exists exclusively in every modern politician America has seated in the chairs of power today including those seeking the presidency while humility is nonexistent. To a person, they are dangerous as a result.

A stray glance at the present occupant of the White House clearly underscores this conclusion. He is a tyrannical beast constructed of ego and nothing more. He is an aberration, an error, a disease, a cancer of our own creation. And he isn’t the only one. Waiting in the wings there are several of the same concoction.

The idea of Uriah Heep sitting in the Oval Office is not a pretty picture, nor would we ever want someone so dubiously self-depreciative. Dickens was wont to overextend his characters’ personalities for purposes of style and impact, but the last thing the United States of America needs is a Heep whose humility subordinates his ego, for a measured ego is indeed an essential characteristic of leaders. The trick is balancing the two.

Jesus Christ is the greatest example of that balance. He was properly humble without a shred of weakness, someone who had the power to destroy if he chose, but instead patiently, honestly and earnestly used his infinite power to teach and heal without giving up his authority in the process.

In an age of image only, the great pitfall for a politician, or should we hope to say, potential leader, is the very human trait of believing you are the person your people have created. And yet, Americans, knowing full well what they see is almost never what they will get, continue to elect men and women who fail the test of being truly humble and decisive at the same time.

If you watch Ronald Reagan at his best, you will note he was consistently self-deprecating, thus enduring. At the same time, he exuded power and authority, not personal, but as the representative of the United States of America, the most powerful nation in the history of the world. Although an actor by trade, he was no phony. Anyone could see he was proud of America and more than happy to let friends and enemies alike know it. It is why he was so powerful, respected and feared throughout the world. One knew where one stood with him. Certainly Mr. Gorbachev would attest to that.

But men like Ronald Reagan don’t seem to exist anymore. When we listen to candidates, Democrat or Republican, members of what has become a separate political class, all we hear are stories about them. The number of times any one of them says “I” in a speech is mind boggling. It attests to a general arrogance when it comes to their personal definition of leadership.

Somewhere in the education of the political class it seems they all were taught leaders are created out of nothing but ego, planted on the earth and meant to tout themselves as saviors rather than servants. The entire idea of “service to the country” has been corrupted to mean tyrannical power according to personal political (and sometimes individual) whims. For America to survive, nothing short of destroying the political class will suffice. Humbling by force those who have not a scintilla of such grace is an absolute necessity.

Jesus said he came to “serve”. He admonished his followers, “the last shall be first, and the first last.” This not to stifle their leadership abilities, after all, these were the very same men he chose to lead the most powerful faith in the history of the world. Their leadership qualities, tempered by his dictum that they should be humble, overcame incredible odds. That lesson has been completely lost.

None of the political class in America display such qualities. Hillary Clinton has no such ability. She is hopelessly mired in herself as are Barack Obama, John Kerry and most, if not all the Republican candidates for the Presidency.

Pundits and purveyors, especially those who daily feed at the political trough, will say there is an absolute necessity for such egoism if one person is to lead not only 330 million of his or her own, but essentially the entire world. Therein lies the abomination however, the perversion of what the Founding Fathers so wisely intended. Americans elected to office are supposed to follow, not lead, they are “representatives” not lords much less royalty.

Where he or she is, who knows, but the hope of America and the world is that somehow, through the process available to us, a man or woman with sufficient strength matched by sufficient humility will arise from the heap that is American politics not to lead us, but to follow our orders which are strict and clear.

President Reagan uttered the memorable words, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” The American people are essentially clamoring for the same thing. They want an end to the political class and they want the wall that has been built by that class between them and their government to be torn down. Only someone humble enough to accept that role, and powerful enough to see it through should be the next president.

Share

Posted in Politics, The Nation.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .


THE NAZI INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX – CORPORATE SUPPORTERS OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD AND ABORTION

The following list comes from 2ndVote.com.

We have eliminated Xerox from the list as the company denies having ever supported Planned Parenthood.  While it may be true, note the number of companies who support Planned Parenthood thus abortions through third party activities.

The following companies have directly funded Planned Parenthood

Adobe

American Express

AT&T

Avon

Bank of America

Bath & Body Works

Ben & Jerry’s

Boeing

Clorox

Converse

Deutsche Bank

Dockers

Energizer

Expedia

ExxonMobil

Fannie Mae

Groupon

Intuit

Johnson & Johnson

La Senza

Levi Strauss

Liberty Mutual

Macy’s

March of Dimes

Microsoft

Morgan Stanley

Nike

Oracle

PepsiCo

Pfizer

Progressive Insurance

Starbucks

Susan G. Komen

Tostitos

Unilever

United Way

Verizon

Wells Fargo

The following companies have supported 3rd party groups that fund Planned Parenthood:

3M

AAA

Abbott Laboratories

Abercrombie & Fitch

Adobe

Aetna

Aflac

Albertsons

Allstate

Amazon

American Airlines

American Express

American Greetings

AmerisourceBergen

Anheuser-Busch

Apostrophe

AT&T

AutoZone

Banana Republic

Barnes and Noble

Belk

Ben & Jerry’s

Best Buy

Black & Decker

Blue Cross Blue Shield

Bristol-Myers Squibb

Calvin Klein

Campbell’s Soup

Caribou Coffee

Caterpillar

CBS

Cheryl’s

Chipotle

Chrysler/Dodge

Cigna

Cisco

Citigroup

Colgate-Palmolive

Comcast

ConocoPhillips

Costco

Crayola

CVS

Dana-Farber Cancer Institute

Darden

Denny’s

Deutsche Bank

DHL

Diageo

DieHard

Discover

Dollar General

Dow Chemical

Dr Pepper Snapple Group

eBay

Ernst & Young

Expedia

Express Scripts Inc. 

Family Dollar

Fannie Mae

FedEx

Food Lion

Ford

Forever 21

Freddie Mac

Gap

GEICO

General Electric

General Mills

General Motors

Goldman Sachs

Groupon

H-E-B

H&R Block

Hallmark Cards

Hanes

Hardee’s

Harris Teeter

Hasbro

HCA Holdings

Henri Bendel

Hershey Company

Hess

Hewlett-Packard

Hillshire Brands Company

Hollister

Home Depot

Home Goods

Honda

Hormel

Houchens Industries

Hurleys

Hy-Vee

IBM

IHOP

Ikea

Ingram Micro

Intel

Intuit

J.Jill

Jack in the Box

JetBlue Airways

JiffyLube

Jo-Ann’s

Joe Boxer

John-Deere

Johnson & Johnson

Johnson Controls

Just Born Inc

Kawasaki

Kellogg’s

Kenmore

Kentucky Fried Chicken

Kimberly-Cark

Kmart

Kohl’s

Kroger

Lands’ End

Lexus

Lockheed Martin

LOFT

Longhorn Steakhouse

Lowes

MAPCO

Mars Inc.

Marshalls

Mary Kay

MasterCard

Morgan Stanley

National Football League

NBC Universal

Nestle

New Balance

Nissan

Nordstrom

Office Depot

Office Max

Old Navy

Olive Garden

Orbitz

Panera Bread

Papa John’s

PayPal

PepsiCo

PINK

Pizza Hut

PricewaterhouseCoopers

ProFlowers

Prudential Financial and Insurance

Publix

Qdoba Mexican Grill

Ralph Lauren

Red Lobster

REI

Rite Aid

Safeway

Sam’s Club

Scripps Networks Interactive

Sears

Seattle’s Best Coffee

Shell Oil

Southern Company

Southwest Airlines

Spirit Airlines

Sprint

Staples

Starbucks

State Farm

Steak ‘n Shake

Subaru

SunTrust

SuperValu

Susan G. Komen

T-Mobile

T.J. Maxx

Taco Bell

Target

Texas Instruments

Toro

Tostitos

Toyota

Tyson Foods

Unilever

US Airways

USAA

Valero Energy Corporation

Victoria’s Secret

Wal-mart

Walgreens

WellPoint

Wells Fargo

Wells Interprises

Whataburger

Whirlpool Corporation

White Castle

Winn-Dixie Stores

YWCA

Zales

Zaxby’s

 

 

Disclaimer: The information provided represents the best efforts of 2nd Vote to report on corporate political and social activities in order to inform concerned citizens about how companies address the issues they care about. Because there are no laws or guidelines that mandate corporations or organizations to disclose their contributions or donors, some activity or donations may go unreported. The information provided is intended for educational purposes only and is periodically

Share

Posted in American Culture (Or Lack Thereof), Business, Politics, The Nation.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .


WHY HILLARY HAS LOST AND WE WILL TOO IF…

The Washington Post, a decidedly left leaning fish wrap, is reporting about Hillary Clinton’s latest poll numbers.  The details are not significant because they are well known, not only to us, but her staff and most importantly her most avid supporters.  I have long said her numbers would catch up with her sooner or later, and now my words are coming true.

For years, Clinton’s “unfavorable” numbers have flirted with the high side of 50% generally speaking.  No one can be elected president with such a number.  Look at this poll and you will see, not only have her unfavorable numbers risen, but her favorable numbers have dropped precipitously.  In politics, that is a disaster for any candidate, for Hillary Clinton it is worse.  Were she in a tight primary race with another Democrat  these numbers would be less significant, i.e. like McDonald’s and Burger King swapping market share, she would be swapping poll numbers with her nearest rival.  But she has no one with whom she is fighting for prominence.  Sanders is far behind, what support he has is so far left it is meaningless.  O’Malley is a flea-weight, falling on his own sword so many times he is a political colander for all intents and purposes.  For Clinton, the numbers are hers and hers alone and though it is far too early for them to be intelligently meaningful in terms of a general race, they are harbingers nonetheless.

The panic inside Clinton’s campaign is palpable and becoming more so.  The number of defenses she has to mount in order to counter the negative press she is encountering as a result of her own unethical if not entirely illegal activities is becoming a whack-a-mole circus where the moles are simply too many and too fast for any staff to catch.

This is a Republican battle with Donald Trump in the lead for one reason only, he speaks to the anger, frustration and powerlessness Americans feel about their own government.  Donald Trump is on top because he has, to put it crudely, balls.  Americans want someone with balls enough to dig them out of this hole of hopelessness Obama and liberalism have been purposely digging for over 50 years.  We had a respite and a massive revitalization with Ronald Reagan, but he was the only real ray of light in the last half century.  Americans are sick and tired of being told we are no damn good and we owe the rest of the world some kind of apology and reparations for being the best and brightest.  We are completely fed up with illegal aliens and others who flaunt the laws the rest of us are forced to obey, those who are forgiven their crimes on the basis of skin color or allowed to crash our borders by the millions so the Democrat party can collect their votes in payment.

Most of all, Americans do not want a political class, what has become an entirely separate class of politicians who spend their lives sucking off the taxpayers’ nipple and so cynically label their careers doing so as “public service”.

Hillary is dead in the water.  If we end up with another career politician, whether Republican or Democrat, we are too.

 

Share

Posted in Politics, The Nation.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .


OF GOD, NATURE AND HOMOSEXUALITY

The science concerning why people become or are simply born homosexual is still uncertain and may remain so forever, but the rationale behind ignoring the aberration and making it acceptable is obvious. No one wants to think of himself or herself as strange. And of course, misery loves company. Thus, forcing a round peg into a square hole and having others try to do the same while commiserating about the process is seen as an honorable, however futile endeavor.

If the sexual proclivities of a group are questioned, it becomes a political issue rather than a social much less a moral one. Groups, collections, communities are made up of voters and those voters mean far more to the political class than morality as defined by decency and honor. Pandering to outcasts as long as they vote is certain to make any politician a rank opportunist without character or moral fiber.

For it cannot be denied by any but the most irrational among us that sexual acts performed with a member of the same gender are plainly wrong, especially in this age of sex for sex’s sake. To call them acts of love is cynicism on an evil level.

Already the calls for my head are mounting to a swell, but they and my head will not change the truth. Homosexuality is an aberration, it is an error in thinking whether it be by choice or by chance. As to its being inherently evil, who is to judge unless we apply biblical admonitions which are very clear. St. Paul, in his letter to the Romans in 1:27 strongly condemns homosexuality, “…and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.”

Many dispute the interpretation, but their arguments fail miserably as they twist, turn and parse Paul’s words to mean precisely the opposite of what he meant. The Old Testament is even clearer. In Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 respectively, the rule is absolute, “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination” and “If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.”

Put the Bible aside and remand the question to modern human thinking, the so-called science of rationality and reason. The evolutionists and those who see mankind as the natural offspring of Nature’s desire to keep life alive would strip us of our souls rendering us mere cover for the earth the same as every other living creature on the planet. If that is so, then the case against homosexuality takes on added torque for how can it follow that if the norm is to propagate, those acts which fail to follow the norm are correct and not abnormal? The argument that if it exists in reality it is part of the norm is specious in and of itself. Abnormalities are the norm, but that does not make them anything other than abnormalities.

The point is, homosexuality does exist, but it is abnormal and the numbers support that conclusion. There are far fewer homosexuals in the world than we are being led to believe which is Nature’s way of saying errors are made all the time in the reproduction of various species. That is to say, of the entire population in America less than 2% are homosexual, even less are lesbian or self-identified bisexuals. The figures aren’t a condemnation, they are illustrative of how anomalies in nature follow similar patterns. In strictly scientific terms, the occurrence of homosexuality must be much higher if it is to be considered part of the norm. No amount of media hype or demonstrations and parades in the streets will change the fact that sexual activities with members of the same gender are abnormal in any sense of the word.

The Bible reflects a body of rules and regulations which ostensibly speak to the relationship of man to God, but it also serves as a manual of proper human activity to the extent very reasonable propositions are set down which on their faces make a great deal of sense. The warning against homosexual activity is both one against sinning and one against the unnaturalness of sexual activities man to man and woman to woman. People may choose to ignore the Bible’s admonitions, but it amounts to railing against the wind. Whether one believes in the word of God or not, men performing sexual acts with other men and women doing the same with other women are violations of humanity’s single most important role, the propagation of the species. Then again, those who are aberrant in their sexual behavior are very likely those who see nothing wrong with destroying the result of what is normal. The two can be connected, however tenuously, homosexuality/lesbianism and infanticide are cut from the same cloth. They are in the vanguard of a death culture which will end badly for them.

Nature determines the strong will survive. They will do so as they have done since the dawn of time, through the natural process of the two sexes one with the other. Homosexuals and lesbians will be shunted aside as they have always been, not so much on moral grounds, but as the natural consequence of humanity’s need to procreate.

Share

Posted in American Culture (Or Lack Thereof), Politics, The Nation.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .


WHAT DOES BILL CLINTON KNOW THAT WE DON’T?

Bill Clinton and the “foundation” he, Hilary and Chelsea head, are helping Jamaica by partnering with Wigton Windfarm, a homegrown entity “to promote greater use of wind and solar energy [in Jamaica], as part of a wider effort to force down exorbitant energy costs in island nations.”[1]

News? Not really, just more of the same unfounded science structured to take advantage of the climate change faithful (and the rest of us) in order to accumulate that one source of energy everyone, especially leftists love, money. It’s not even news for the Clintons specifically. Gathering other people’s money by the boatload is simply what they do.

What is news however may be gleaned from Bill’s extended absence from Hillary’s campaign. The standard response to the question, “Where’s Bill?” is usually an amalgam of guesses from “He’s a political leper” to “He’s busy doing his own thing”…whatever that may be. The truth may be in the soup somewhere between the two in that being one of the quintessential politicians of the modern era, Bill Clinton knows a loser when he sees one, even if it is his wife.

Hillary’s latest numbers signal a campaign that is in a tailspin. Certainly, no matter what she says, does, doesn’t say or do, she will garner a substantial number of votes. Given the electoral college system, she may even be elected, but the prize will be not be handed to her, not in the way she and her people believe it will or should. Hillary Clinton will have to work for this one. The question is, does she have what it takes? By all accounts, with the exception of her Senate election by New Yorkers who have a strain of political idiocy that keeps them in political bondage, Hillary Clinton has been tested and found greatly wanting. In short, she is not her husband and will never be anything close to the political animal he was and is.

Bill Clinton must know this. He may or may not be waiting in the wings to be called up for support if not as a savior. A good wager would be he is not much interested in being a part of a campaign so mired in the mud it has no chance of succeeding. He, after all, went out as a winner, his horrible moral background and ill repute notwithstanding. He is taken seriously on the world stage. He is wealthy beyond his wildest dreams. His libido, while perhaps not what it once was, is routinely satiated by dalliances for which he has other people pay. In short, he has very little to gain and a great deal to lose should Hillary continue her unelection campaign to its natural conclusion.

In the annals of modern political history, only two candidates come to mind for their overwhelming lack of luster, Bob Dole and Hillary Clinton, both chosen for their positions in the political queue. Had Bob Dole the least swagger, charisma and ability to self-promote, he would have beaten Bill Clinton in 1996 as Bubba by that time had scandalized the nation to disgrace.

The same applies to Hillary Clinton in the sense she has nothing to offer and no way to offer it if she did. So sans vibrancy is she the crowds who do come to see her are almost always subdued, there because they have to be for whatever the reasons. When Clinton speaks, she does so in a fashion that is painful to all but the most jaded Hillary fan. Even her defenders are at a loss. Lanny Davis, the fawning sycophant lawyer, after being challenged by a talk show host, hung up the phone because he was not allowed to run his mouth in her favor using old and worn talking points, but was made to answer poignant questions, uncomfortable questions, so uncomfortable his usually pithy lawyer’s comebacks were stifled. Frustrated, he did what Hillary supporters who’ve been pushed to the wall always do, walk away from the discussion.

Bill Clinton, as shrewd as he is, will not willingly walk himself into the same arena littered with the carcasses of Hillary supporters who have failed to make her what she most certainly isn’t, a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. And if Bill has written her off, it is or should be abundantly clear, the rest of the political world will sooner or later.

[1] http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/Bill-Clinton-Helping-Jamaica

Share

Posted in Politics, The Nation.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .


OF DONALD TRUMP, JOHN MCCAIN AND PLANNED PARENTHOOD

Two issues have crossed the wires with so much fanfare they bear comment. The first is Donald Trump’s comments regarding Senator John McCain’s hero status.

Is the Senator a hero or not? In the strictest sense of the word, yes, but the qualification must be added, he is a “war hero”, not any other kind. Without stripping the man of his due accolades as a Vietnam era war hero, it is far more important to qualify his status post prisoner of war. From that perspective, Senator McCain is indeed lacking.

Trump’s use of verbiage which may or may not have disparaged John McCain’s war record aside, the truth is, Senator McCain is, in strictly conservative circles a failure of gigantic proportions. More often than not he sides with the enemy. On occasion, he is the enemy. We’re talking political of course, but at what point should his war hero status be set aside as the cover it is for a Senator whose bombast and political traitorism has been the hallmark of his career? Yes, he suffered and in effect did his country proud as a POW who made it through the agony to the pinnacle of success in service to his country as a candidate for President. But it isn’t enough in view of the fact his stand and performance on certain issues is sufficient to erase his contribution.

Charles Krauthammer once quipped that “McCain’s apostasies are too numerous to actually count.” In the same article, published in 2008 before the presidential election, Human Events journalist, Jed Babbin wrote, “…what McCain says about his record is astonishingly misleading.”

Here are a few of his most egregious offenses:

When debating the 2001 Bush tax cuts, McCain claimed he voted against them because they were not accompanied by commensurate spending cuts. But in a Senate floor speech on the subject, he stated, “I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who most need tax relief.”

His stance on immigration is well known for its chameleon characteristics. He pushed for the McCain-Kennedy-Bush bill which failed, but which earned him an endorsement from the New York Times. His position on immigration is in direct conflict with his constituency, yet he persists in talking liberal-Democrat solutions.

Time and time again he has eschewed conservative principles to the point his own Arizona Republican Party called his record, “long and terrible.” In a statement issued by the ARP, they condemned him in the strongest terms by resolving, “Only in times of great crisis or betrayal is it necessary to publicly censure our leaders. Today we are faced with both. For too long we have waited, hoping Senator McCain would return to our party’s values on his own. That has not happened.”

Slough to the side John McCain’s rhetoric and Senate career as just another politician’s means of staying a politician, but how does McCain’s political history as a self-styled “maverick” and disappointment to his state and constituents support his war-hero status? Should the two be connected in any way? Are we supposed to forgive Obama for his fecklessness and incompetence because he’s the first black president? How far are we to go before what happens in the present eclipses what happened in the past?

John McCain is a war hero, but he is not one in any other vein nor is he a statesman. On the contrary, he is one of the old guard, a washed up politician who believes in his heart that in order to get along one must at all costs go along regardless of the consequences for the country. For Donald Trump or anyone else to make comment on John McCain’s political history is not only fair game but extremely important, not for what it says about the man, but what it says about those people and institutions we mistakenly hold up as sacrosanct for fear of being labeled.

The second issue is far more grave for it speaks to a culture in the formative stages of rot. To label abortion as anything other than the abomination it is would be to give some semblance of cover to the chieftains at Planned Parenthood who this week were exposed for selling pieces of aborted babies for profit. Seeking protection under the umbrella of it all being for the purposes of “research”, the latest video has Medical Director of Planned Parenthood Pasadena and San Gabriel Valley, California, Mary Gatter, in the act of negotiating with someone posing as a buyer.

In the video, Ms. Gatter is shown to be suggesting that the price for baby organs should be around $100. She then adds, “Let me just figure out what others are getting, and if this is in the ballpark, then it’s fine, if it’s still low, then we can bump it up. I want a Lamborghini.”

As some have observed, these are the very same people who claim to be serving humanity. They are the liberals of America who stand in the streets and shout, “Black lives matter!” They are the women who, when Bill Clinton or Bill Cosby are caught raping women, stand by and say nothing, but rail vociferously at Sarah Palin for being a staunch conservative wit well known principles they’ve never been able to shake.

The callousness displayed by Ms. Gatter and previously in another video, Dr. Deborah Nucatola, while speaking about murdered babies and their value in parts, is not only shocking, it is sickening. One cannot help but think of the Nazi women who worked in the death camps, how they willingly, and in some cases actively participated in some of the most horrific perversions perpetrated by human beings on other human beings. The people at Planned Parenthood are cut of the same cloth, purveyors of murder on a wholesale scale to the extent they profit from the very organs of babies as did the Nazis the gold from Jewish teeth.

No society can exist in a culture of death. How we came to this point has been the subject of discussion on this website for many years. The Age of Aquarius, its adherents, the baby-boomers whose lives were consumed by sex, drugs and rock and roll are at fault. They who condemned the government and anyone under thirty are now those old, perverted, decayed politicians who run the government. They had no shame in their youth, they have no dignity in their dotage. This is what you get when God is pushed from one’s home and evil is welcomed in.

Share

Posted in Politics, The Nation.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .


DONALD TRUMP, THE BILLIONAIRE WHO SPEAKS THE PEOPLE’S LANGUAGE

For those like John McCain who spend their limited time on this political planet on the wrong side of pretty much everything, the trashing of Donald Trump seems like a clarion call to all like minded Republicans that they should fly, fly away from anything that smacks of change in the status quo. Somehow we are to imagine that sticking with old guard Republicans or the standard fare of political candidates is the way towarDONALD-TRUMPd real, substantive change, the kind of change we all want, the kind we all know we absolutely need, the kind we will most certainly not get from most of the present Republican presidential field.

McCain et. al. are like antebellum Southern gentlemen, loath to diminish themselves by re-slinging the mud thrown at them. They’d rather prance around in their white cottons bellowing, “Yes suh,” and “Ah beg youah pahdon, suh!” The thought of standing on principle, that is, dealing with the realities and fighting tooth and nail to right wrongs even if it takes soiling their suits is absolute anathema. And it isn’t enough they won’t fight in the political trenches, they will turn what fight they have in them against their own to make sure those people don’t fight either.

The politics of political offensiveness has been the bailiwick of Democrats for decades. In my book, “Running: How To Design And Execute A Winning Political Campaign” I make the statement that I literally stole much of what I think are winning approaches from Democrats and Liberals. Why? Because fighting fire with fire is, regardless of what the Republican establishment would have you believe, effective, very effective.

Telling seniors that Grandma will be thrown over the cliff by Republicans is not only totally untrue, it is offensive, but it worked. Telling America something it already knows and is without doubt true, that illegal immigrants, mostly Mexicans, are flooding our borders and that a sizable number of them are hardened criminals, including murderers, rapists and drug dealers not only makes sense, but needs to be said over and over again. Donald Trump is proving the maxim of the left, attack, it works. At this writing he is number one in most Republican primary polls.

The McCains of this world along with the majority of Republican presidential candidates, out of fear or simple dishonesty, disparage Trump fro actually articulating what they would love to, but won’t. While railing against Trump, they quietly sit back and allow him to speak for them. When asked about the same issue, they manipulate the English (and Spanish) language to walk the tightrope. They are for the same remedies as Trump, but it’s in the way they say it that is the difference between him and them.

Trump has hit a nerve, not simply on the illegal immigration issue, but on several others. He is doing what all great communicators do, articulating publicly what average individuals think privately. His secret isn’t incendiary rhetoric, it’s a discussion of fairness.

It is no secret to Americans that every illegal immigrant has broken American law. Trump is merely stating a fact American politicians have either ignored or kicked down the road for decades. Our law specifies every illegal alien not should, but must be deported or imprisoned.

Donald Trump doesn’t go that far, but there are those Americans, myself included, who wish one of the candidates would. Why? Because it offends an American’s sense of fairness that if one of us should go astray of the law, it is an absolute certainty we will be called to account. There will be no leeway, no forgiveness, no looking the other way, nothing. We will answer for our violations. We will be damned if illegal foreigners don’t. Democrats want to talk fairness, illegal immigration is the starting point.

The Republicans are trying desperately to marginalize Donald Trump, to make him appear as if he is a lout, a clown, a loud mouthed shyster who isn’t serious about American reformation when the fact is he is the only one who is.

Mr. Trump may not hold all positions which speak to true conservatism. His passive acceptance of Obamacare to the extent he has called for a single-payer system is frightening to be sure, but he is a shrewd businessman who can read tea leaves. It is an issue certain to be readdressed during the campaign. His stance on taxation, that is a confiscatory rate for high earners is completely out of sync with that sense of fairness Americans hold dear. These, among others, are positions on which he must be questioned, but not on immigration, not on building a wall or other barrier to keep illegals out, not on trade, foreign affairs and dealing with terrorism. On these issues, he is crystal clear and correct.

At minimum we know Donald Trump will not be pushed around by anyone, not the Chinese, not Putin and certainly not the mullahs of terrorist states. And who, if not the author of a book on making deals, would be better at both domestic compromise and foreign counterstrikes than a man who has dealt on the worldwide stage in the trenches of business as opposed to a mere politician who has accomplished little but making a living off the public teat his entire life.

The Republican establishment and even people like Rush Limbaugh tell us there is no such thing as a perfect conservative, that we will have to accept someone who scores less than 100% on the litmus test. What is Donald Trump if not precisely the kind of conservative they’re talking about? Trump is what the Republicans need to win, a personality, a stand-out, the personification of what the modern candidate should be, someone who knows how to gain and keep media attention, someone who knows how to get things done.

Compare and contrast Donald Trump with Hillary Clinton, the firebrand pro-America man of determination, action and success versus the bland, uninspiring, deeply flawed, conniving and untrustworthy wife of an equally defective ex-president. America votes for superstars, that’s what we’ve become. It will vote for Trump if he is nominated.

 

Share

Posted in Politics, The Nation, The World.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .


THE JOY OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE

The Supreme Court has spoken. Presumably we are all supposed to assume that it’s game over, we went as far as we could defending the traditional and righteous institution of marriage being defined as that state of being between a man and a woman. Five people decided that a few thousand years of human history should be discarded for a couple of decades of human aberration. It’s done, they’ve spoken. What are those of us on the losing side of this decision supposed to do now?

Most Americans would say, “Accept it, that’s the system and for better or worse it worked.”

I say, do not accept it. I say, fight it. I ask, who the hell are these five people in Washington to tell me what I must accept as moral and righteous? I say those of us who find homosexuality and lesbianism wrong should stand up and be counted. We should fight back by refusing to acknowledge that which the majority of the Supreme Court has said we must.

I don’t and will never recognize homosexual and lesbian marriage. I will never participate in a marriage ceremony for them. I will never cater to them in any way at any price not because I hate them, but because I believe what they do is wrong and nothing the Supreme Court forces on me will make me think or act differently. And I am most certainly not alone.

It is time for wholesale civil disobedience in this country. Nothing else will work. Clearly, voting for the other guy turned out to be the same as voting for the guy who brought us to the point of wanting to vote for the other guy expecting the other guy would do what we wanted him to do. But the other guy turned out to be just as bad. Worse, he bald faced lied to us and now we’re stuck with him until the next go around which will produce the same kind of garbage we have in office now.

We have a narcissistic nincompoop man-child in the White House surrounded by sycophants, deviants and Communists. On top of that we have a Congress led by another petulant youngster in the House who takes bullies and takes revenge on anyone who disagrees with him. Over in the Senate we have a curmudgeonly old man who refuses to leave the 1960s for the 21st century in terms of the way business is done in that chamber.

Neither man recognizes, or if they do, they refuse to acknowledge the danger that is the Democrat party and the ultra liberal left working against the United States of America. Instead of fighting like there is no tomorrow (which is very nearly the case), they talk and talk, wring their hands and then howl over their impotence. “Just give us the White House”, they say, “then we’ll show you what we can do. Then we’ll repeal Obamacare, then we’ll do something about the IRS and the tax code, then we’ll fight Isis, radical Islam and prevent Iran from getting the bomb and then we’ll really show you how America can come back from the brink it’s on now…just give us more time, more money and more votes.”

If you need any more proof than looking at the entire governmental structure of our country from the federal to your town or village (don’t kid yourselves, how about your school boards) that we are all alone in this fight then you are living in a fantasy world where proof is a pint of ice cream to soothe your sugar craving and solve all your problems.

Until those of us who believe in the traditional America we once knew, the one that afforded people the dignity of making it on their own in their own way without the government telling some of us what we must believe while sanctioning the activities of others whose lifestyles we know to be aberrant, then we will get the government we deserve, but not the one our children and grandchildren do.

Civil disobedience means simply not obeying the laws we know are wrong or those we know violate the principles on which all free societies rely, the freedom to choose between right and wrong, real right and wrong.

Imagine masses of Americans simply refusing to acknowledge the Supreme Court’s decisions(s) or our respective legislatures’ laws? Imagine if we refused to bake a cake for gay people or take pictures of their weddings and then refused to acknowledge the lawsuit or government reaction to our choices. What would be the logical outcome of such massive disobedience be? The government would either have to change to suit us, or we would go to war with it…and win.

Share

Posted in American Culture (Or Lack Thereof), Politics, The Nation.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .


THE STARS AND BARS REVISITED

confederate flagThe Stars and Bars or the Confederate States of America flag may be an offensive symbol to some, but it is a part of American history nonetheless, a proud part when you consider the number of men who fought and died to preserve their homes and culture.

Yes, slavery was a part of that culture as it was throughout most of human history. We do not discount the contribution of Rome to civilization based on the fact it existed in large part because slaves were bought, kept, sold, killed and worked like animals. Slavery was and remains a heinous part of the human story. Slavery in America is but a very small part of that history.

It should be noted, slavery was not of Confederate origin, nor was it a Southern problem particularly. It was and is a global scourge that haunts us still and yet we see more politically correct poof, more feints of outrage, more posturing, bloviating, yapping and fake philosophizing over a flag than any action to save those being enslaved today.

The Confederate flag is also a symbol of the American spirit. Against all the odds, the South was poised to win the Civil War. It fielded far superior military leaders who came literally within yards of complete victory. It wasn’t superior generalship that won the day for the Union at Gettysburg, considered the turning point of the war, it was blind luck. And it wasn’t General Grant who outsmarted General Lee in the final days to bring the war to an end, it was sheer numbers and Grant’s willingness to sacrifice them wholesale against his adversary who could not, some say would not do the same.

If anything, the South’s tale of the Civil War is far more noble in the fighting than is the Union’s. The Southern warrior spirit, that element of the American character which drove those men to fight so hard for their homelands (as separate state entities) is not only laudable, but glorious especially in light of the overwhelming odds against them. It was the same spirit that brought relief to the Allies in WW I and total victory to the world in WW II.

The Confederate flag represents far more of what was good about America at the time. Most importantly it represents the original intent of the Founders, states’ rights as opposed to what we presently have, what they feared more than democracy itself and what they desperately tried to prevent with the Constitution, an all powerful, all reaching, totally invasive central government.

The motives behind secession were therefore not simply the preservation of slavery, but a rebellion against creeping tyrannical federalism, a system which though excellently illustrated by Publius seventy-two years before was even then becoming merely a function of the more populous states imposing their wills on the less populous. It is amazing that as a country, we do not review that lesson in the context of how we are being tyrannized today by metropolitan liberals who dominate the most populous states with the exception of Texas.

The Confederacy might have won handily had it not been as poorly led politically as it was magnificently led militarily and that is perhaps the reason for its downfall. It would be good for all Americans to realize Lincoln himself was more than happy to renegotiate the status of slaves in the South and elsewhere if only to keep the states united. And though the South had very different ideas about such negotiations, had Jefferson Davis and the leaders in the several states been more inclined to a negotiated settlement rather than the final option of war, the Stars and Bars might very well be flying in those states today. Then again, Southern leaders were justifiably wary of their Northern counterparts, especially the abolitionists. Southerners were under no misconception that any negotiation would be at best temporary, at worst a death sentence for the South as a singularly distinct and politically independent entity.

Wrapped in the idiom of that “peculiar institution”, the Confederate flag indeed represents a perverse culture, but the minority of that culture. Southern folkways and mores were far beyond the mere necessity for slaves to work its plantations and cotton fields. The vast majority of Southerners didn’t own slaves, nor did they control gigantic tracts of land churning out the cotton so much in demand. Most were simple farmers living an agrarian lifestyle if not unique to the South, at minimum it was typically Southern by that time and comfortable, in keeping with a less bustling routine than their brethren in the industrial metropolises of the North.

There is evidence the average Southerner did not like the institution of slavery, but he understood it. That isn’t to say the institution wouldn’t have lasted much longer had the Civil War not occurred. Rather, it speaks to the individual Southerner who lived in his or her own small world making the attempt to prosper as best as possible without being bothered by anyone else’s issues, problems or interference. The Southern “me” attitude, unlike the North’s more urban “we” attitude emphasized individuality, a freedom that recognized and appreciated neighbors, but not to the extent of relying on them for an identity.

The Southern man of the antebellum South and the modern man of post-industrial America may have more in common than is readily observable. With the ever increasing intrusion of the federal government into our lives, there is that undercurrent of rebellion which may find expression in an uprising of some nature in the very near future by one segment of society versus another.

The Stars and Bars flag actually means more in terms of the true American spirit than does the Stars and Stripes. It is a reminder of a time when gentility had a place, when women were exalted rather than being rammed into false equality. It was a time of gentlemen going off to war not to defend slavery as much as to defend their right to be left alone to fend for themselves, to conduct their own business without sticking their noses into someone else’s.

As a matter of history, the Stars and Bars flag should be flown proudly from the pinnacles of every state capitol in the original Confederacy as a reminder of what and where we were once, what and where we are now. While black people are no longer slaves and no one responsible for that peculiar institution is alive, it would be good to remember they were in fact freed at enormous cost and that is enough. Furthermore, the flag of the Confederate States of America should be a reminder that though it is popular myth to believe the Civil War was fought to end slavery, it was actually fought to prevent secession, a matter that has not been settled as so many might think for there could always be another if government becomes too oppressive to endure by enslaving us all.

Share

Posted in American Culture (Or Lack Thereof), The Nation.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .


RACISM IS A PURPOSEFUL MISNOMER

Is the shooting of parishioners at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina a tragedy? Perhaps, but only because that may not be the most accurate term to describe what happened. In some respects it is more, in others it is a manifestation of life in any country where 330,000,000 people have been told “diversity is good, unity is bad.” As a tragic event in the history of those people, it qualifies, but as an anomaly under the present cultural circumstances, it doesn’t. To expect that it won’t happen if we eliminate guns, inculcate generations with the ideals of racial harmony and legislate love is not only unrealistic, it is doomed to abject failure.

Wholesale murder is a fact of human existence. Every ethnic and racial group has participated at one time or another on a variety of scales. Anthropologists still debate whether humans wiped out Neanderthals 40,000 years ago (blame the white man of course). The Old Testament discusses the wholesale killing of the Amelekites and the Midianites among others. We have the testament of ancient eyewitnesses who proudly chronicled the slaughter of thousands by their military leaders. There are songs and poems lifting killing, war and genocide to art. In almost every case, the mere threat of wholesale killing is enough to subdue the most numerous and unruly people. If there was any need to prove the point, all one has to do is read his or her Roman history. If you need a more contemporary set of illustrations, look at modern China then turn your gaze on Islam as the mass murdering movement du jour.

Exposed to this over all human history, is it any wonder why it exists today and worse perhaps why it is of fleeting interest to the average human being? We are not newly immune from such horror as a result of an evolutionary leap. On the contrary, we’ve been conditioned to accept death on a monumental scale throughout our existence. We are after all, by our nature violent creatures. Whether we ever will evolve from that state is impossible to say, we haven’t so far and there is no indication based on the latest human developments that we will anytime soon.

Humanity’s innate character suggests the vast majority of human beings are content to be docile as long as the pact between and among themselves is not broken. Peace is to be welcomed, but it is not to be expected and it is always tenuous and impermanent.

We are a warrior species at our core. When threatened, most of us will protect ourselves and our blood relatives. Oftentimes, if given the opportunity to advance our positions in life, we will take advantage, in some cases by killing to the point of making war. Still, our preference is to live and let live as long as letting the other person live doesn’t threaten our own present and future conditions.

Racism is a misnomer for what this is, but if people are comfortable calling it what it isn’t, so be it. This then is the nature of racism and it is as much, if not more of a problem for black people than it is for all others since as a minority, black people are seen as the oppressed, but that distinction apparently hasn’t made a difference nor is it likely to make one. Now the oppressed appear to be the oppressors as minority rights supersede majority rule not by a mutually agreed upon social contract, but by fiat from above forcing the majority to accept the minority though their cultures clash so ferociously.

To say Dylan Roof committed his crime as a result of racism is to say those who destroyed Ferguson and rioted in Baltimore did what they did for the same reason. But it doesn’t matter, in either case the deeds were done, lives lost, property destroyed because one segment of the population simply hates the other.

Mutual hatred is not an anomaly among human beings, it is the norm. Yet it is imperative we understand the real reasons for our hatreds. For the most part, whites don’t hate black people for being black and it is a certainty blacks don’t hate whites for simply being white. We hate each other for being who we are in relation to one another. It isn’t racism, it’s a clash of cultures which are distinguished by the color of someone’s skin. It’s like enemies in different uniforms, we don’t hate the uniforms, just those who wear them.

Is it evil to hate another race of people? If you believe all hate is evil, then it is. But if you are in the position of believing one race is bent on having a negative effect or even destroying the other, then hatred is justified as a function of self-preservation. It will not be eradicated by hope, legislation or a combination of the two. It will not be eradicated at all, ever.

The word “racism” and all its derivatives are actually meaningless. No amount of its use will change the way people think about each other, not when they perceive the other side as their enemy. The opposite will occur.

Karen Attiah, identified as a “Deputy opinions editor” for the Washington Post is a black woman. In an article she wrote yesterday (June 18, 2015) she cites “studies” but only identifies one done by the University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center which concluded “millennials are just about as racist as previous generations…” But what she really means is that white people hate black people as much today as they did yesterday. She conveniently avoids, as do ninety percent of all people with venues to speak from, mentioning the fact that had a study been done asking black people what they thought of white people the results would be incredibly similar, not because blacks hate whites any more than whites hate blacks, but because they hate each other equally as a function of being human beings, nothing more.

The point is, it doesn’t matter.

Yes, we are racist, all of us. We are human. We have our likes and dislikes, our loves and hatreds. We cannot be expected to think and feel about another race the way we are told, especially when what we are being told amounts to ignoring that which we may understand from our own observations and dealings with one another.

Instead of hammering and yammering on about racism, we should be admitting to ourselves that human nature dictates the need for a level of civility such that if a society is going to work, that is, if people are going to live within proximity of each other in safety and confidence, we must control our hatreds because we will never love each other.

It also means that if we choose not to live near someone we hate, regardless of their color or any other factor, we have a right to do so as they have a right to keep us from living near or among them. It amounts to a realization that the social pact between and among us, if it is going to be honored, must be viewed in the stark light of reality. Some of us are going to hate others for whatever reasons we may harbor. The reality is expected and therefore acceptable as part of the human condition. In that context, to think that somehow murder on a wholesale scale for reasons of hatred can be avoided is delusional. To think of it as a violation of the pact we have as a society makes far more sense. To deal with it harshly as a violation of our pact is our duty.

What should we do with Dylan Roof? Execute him of course, but not for hating black people, for violating the communal pact, that’s what is called law and it is or should be entirely colorblind while admitting it cannot control the thinking, feeling and actions of human beings, but exists to outline our societal expectations of one another and to punish violators after the fact. It is the best we can do.

Share

Posted in American Culture (Or Lack Thereof), The Nation.

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .




© 2006-2015 P. J. Fusco & Co. All Rights Reserved -- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright