Once again, it’s about ignoring what was said, by those you don’t like

The Republican National Convention is over, and while the dust settles, we’re getting endless commentaries on how “horrible” and “ignorant” the voters were to pick Trump, then how “amazingly wonderful” the DNC voters were to pick Hillary, just nothing on the fact that she’s abused power, would be in jail were she not Hillary Clinton, and so much more. Well, just as we saw with Piers Morgan not long ago, John Oliver has decided to educate America as to why we’re all idiots.

Now, I couldn’t finish the video as I could tell I was getting angry, and I don’t like stress like that, so every point isn’t covered, nor are these in any specific order. To start off, just as has happened since she gave the speech, Melania’s “plagiarism” is hot news. Never mind that Michelle took much of her speech from Saul Alinski, or that the “plagiarized” bits were things many people might say (talk about their childhood, their parents, their ethics, etc) but when Melania even sounds like something she said might be close to something Michelle said, she’s “stealing the speech.” Not long after that hype started though, a photo started making the rounds pointing out that her dress was about $135 while Hillary’s jacket was over $10,000, with Melania speaking about prosperity and Hillary about poverty. Well, just as always, as soon as their queen is shown to be a hypocrite, the claws come out. Rather than simply ignore a story they don’t like, it became about how Melania likely didn’t pay for that, someone gave it to her, and so much more. Never mind that Hillary showed she doesn’t care if she’s seen as a hypocrite, Melania shouldn’t plagiarize and we shouldn’t point out that she didn’t show up to speak to people who work hard for their money, wearing a jacket that would pay for a very nice vacation, we are to bow to Hillary, and never question her.

Next, Oliver’s bit and how he just goes on and on, telling us that if we vote for Trump, we’re idiots. He points out that someone from an MMA organization is there to talk about Trump’s business acumen. Naturally, he can’t just point out the topic and speech, but has to make fun of who was chosen to speak. That not being enough, he then insults Antonio Sabato Jr. for saying he doesn’t believe Obama is a Christian. Sabato also said it’s what he believes, and he is not going to force others to believe that, but no, Sabato is a horrible facist who wants to force you to parrot him, just ignore how he said that’s not what he thinks. Well, since he couldn’t ramble on about a less than 20 second sound bite, he goes off on Trump’s evilness. He talks about how he wants a “wall, to keep Mexicans out” after playing a bit from Trump where he talks about convicted violent criminals who’s deportation was ordered, but they’re still here. To the left, that’s the same, anyone who wants to enforce the law wants to stop “poor families who just want a better life” from coming to the US. They must ignore that Mexico has a border barrier on their southern border, that entering Mexico illegally is a guaranteed one way trip to jail, and how no one in the Mexican government cares about speaking English to you, nor will you ever get benefits. So, ignoring all of that, and ignoring that Trump’s comment was about finding CRIMINALS who have been sentenced and deportation ordered, and simply carrying that out, Trump is now a racist.

Moving on, and this will be the end for me since I’m tired of pointing out hypocrisy. Ted Cruz, a 2016 hopeful, gave a speech that was well written and delivered, the only thing he didn’t say was that he implicitly supports and endorses Trump. Now, for a party who has pointed out any time the DNC orders people to ignore what a candidate is doing, or orders them to support one candidate, you’d think a speech about listening to the candidates and voting your conscience wouldn’t be horrible, but no, apparently, the RNC delegates want Cruz tarred and feathered for not bowing to them and doing what they tell him. Trump knew about the speech and didn’t try to stop it, meaning it didn’t bother him. While Oliver apparently equates Trump knowing Cruz wouldn’t completely endorse him is tantamount to the Titanic’s captain knowing about the iceberg in time to turn and saying no, it’s not a big deal! Why must everyone fall lock step into place and verbally say “I support Trump?” Who you vote for is your business, period. I have never nor will I ever tell anyone doing an exit poll who I voted for, you can if you want, but that’s the key, it’s YOUR CHOICE. Why then is it so horrible for Cruz to MAKE UP HIS OWN MIND? Simply put, the RNC is more worried about looking united than actually uniting the party under a banner of common sense, and doing what they say, that being NOT TRYING TO CONTROL PEOPLE.

Finally, there was a lot about how feelings aren’t fact, and how, apparently, nothing said means anything because it had the word feelings in it. I’d say I’m sorry, but I’m not, but when you “feel the economy is suffering” that’s not an emotional feeling, it’s a real feeling. I feel it in the fact that costs have risen on so many things that even with a good job, I’m living paycheck to paycheck. I don’t feel safe, because out government is trying to import people who have trashed Europe, raped countless women and children, and chant death to America while demanding we give them free crap. You see, you can “feel” something without it being just emotions, well, until you have a man who feels he’s really a woman, then it’s fact, we can’t argue, we must use the gender pronoun he wants, even before he tells us, and he can go into the ladies’ room and we can’t complain. Never mind that he is biologically male, he feels like he’s really a female, so he is, and we can’t argue. Do you see the circular logic and hypocrisy?

Well, I’ve ranted enough, and as I said at the start, I don’t like what stress does to me, so I’m going to turn on an audio book and just work today, as for the rest, it will work out, I just hope it’s before it’s too late.

Please follow and like us:

We are at a fork in the road, which way we go determines our fate

More and more of late, I’ve seen countless examples of the best and worst of society and humanity. We’ve had Police Officers murdered by cowards who claim to be part of the BLM movement, while we’ve seen members of the black community stand up and denounce the violence. We’ve seen people come together in support of those being targeted, while others just sit and wait for a chance to pull the trigger. More recently, we’ve seen the attacks on the Trump campaign escalate, now claiming that Melania should have told about how Donald proposed, then claiming she used Michelle Obama’s speech, all while ignoring that, to my knowledge, no First Lady, before or after an election, has told about the proposal, or that Michelle used many direct quotes from people she did not cite, as that would show that the media is desperate to get Trump.

More remotely, we’ve seen people demanding that they have a right to not be offended, while offending others right and left. A college student attending an assembly designed to offend hurling insults and screaming profanities at the professor leading it, them demanding that they “get the hate speech off our campus.” It has to stop. We need to not only go back and teach that the rights you have are in the Bill Of Rights, and aside from adding Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, that’s it. You do not have a right to force a private business to serve you, nor is it a “hate crime” for said business to turn away a customer. If you’re in a discussion and someone will not just stop and say “you’re right, you’re wonderful” but rather makes counter points, you don’t get to just stop it, and then claim that the other person was hateful or the like. I have had an experience on a college campus where in a debate about supply side vs classical vs Dickensian economics, I was called a racist, then shouted over any time I tried to speak. I simply wrote out “If you refuse to let me speak, you forfeit the debate and I win.” then walked away. I was grabbed by the idiot, and only when (I am a former detention officer) I broke the hold and put my (now) attacker in a bent arm bar against a wall, did the person begin screaming that I’d broken their arm and should be jailed for assault. Thankfully, there was a campus PD officer there, who saw it all, and actually arrested the idiot for assaulting me first, and ensured me the video would be attached to the report. But this shows the attitude. This person was losing a debate, so first tried to be the only one to speak, and when I just walked away, assaulted me, only to claim assault when I defended myself. I’ve also had a woman yell at me that she “doesn’t need a man to open a door” only to then continue shouting about how rude I am when I said “OK” and went in, not holding the door. She then became very upset that I had the “gall” to stand up and quote her words, explaining that if she didn’t want me to do that, I would respect that wish. The attitude for her is “I’m always right, you’re always wrong, I get to berate you and you can’t say boo” and they are horribly offended when that doesn’t happen.

So, the question is this, and it’s fairly simple. How can we pick the correct path so that we don’t end up with a country full of idiots who will sue when they aren’t given free stuff, or when a private business owner (who has the right to refuse service) doesn’t take their money? We need to start in public schools, by ending the “show up and write your name and you pass” crap that so many schools have begun. We need to stop teaching the test so that kids pass and schools aren’t defunded. We need to teach the subject matter, and if we do, they’ll pass a test. But beyond that, we need to stand up and tell those demanding that they’re special and the rest of the world doesn’t matter to shut up, get a job, and just live their lives. Amazingly, those who are in those demographics (gay, black, etc) but who just live their lives, well, they aren’t told they can’t buy a cake, or what have you. Naturally, they also won’t go to a small bakery owned and run by people who have made public their strong faith, they’d go to a bakery with ideals like their own. But then again, those screaming and suing don’t really want equality, they want to be elevated, told their special and given the world on a silver platter, all of this paid for by the very people they hurl insults at. I guess our money is fine, they just don’t want to have to see us, or hear us, or realize that we have the same actual rights as them.

Please follow and like us:

Eye In The Sky

So, I just watched Eye in the Sky and I have to say it’s spot on for the arguments being bandied about all over today. The basic plot is a debate on the legitimacy of using drone strikes on any target, on “high value” targets, and every point in between. I want to clarify now, without any reservation, that any loss of civilian life in a military operation is horrible, and I am very glad that the military forces of the civilized world do all they can to avoid that very thing. Sadly, it’s not possible to completely remove that possibility, and that fact, often, results in decisions that are not only all but impossible to make, but weight heavily on those making them, and those they then order to act.

Without spoiling the movie, I want to ask a question, so I’ll set up a scenario that is far from what the movie shows. The FBI gets intelligence on a group based somewhere in the U.S. planning a massive strike on an urban center. This attack will cost hundreds their lives. Men, women and children WILL DIE if this attack is not prevented. Now, the ring leaders are on the most wanted list, and so, have been being hunted for a long time prior to this intelligence coming in, and that hunt leads the FBI to the safe house being used to prepare for this attack. Part of this situation could include citizens of countries friendly to the U.S., so they will of course let those governments know that one of their citizens, who is on the most wanted list, may be killed. The friendly governments will agree to act, grudgingly perhaps, but the benefits of stopping an attack outweigh wanting a show trial.

Now, once approval is given, let’s look at the target area. We’ll set this at a cabin in Nebraska, at least 100 yards from the nearest home. The targets are all inside, preparing, but at the very last minute, another person shows up, and halts everything. We won’t go into who this person is, we’ll just say that their presence is enough for many people to question if the strike should happen. So, the question, would you let an attack happen that will, with almost 100% certainty, cost hundreds of lives, to save one? You’ve been briefed on what these people can do if they leave, and the likelihood of stopping them is less than 5%, as they will leave in more than one group, and only one can be followed. You can’t go in on foot, as they will slaughter your forces. What do you do?

I’ll stop here, so as not to spoil the movie. Alan Rickman, as always, gives a performance that leaves you with goosebumps. So, comment here, or on the tweet, or write your own post somewhere. The question, while it doesn’t seem so, is actually a simple one. If you could act with certainty of minimal collateral damage to save hundreds, would you? It’s almost the same question that comes up in the gun control debate, if you had to choose between killing one person or watching that person kill one or more person you love, could you pull the trigger? I have my handgun license, and every time I carry my weapon off my land, I pray I won’t need to even consider drawing it, let alone use it. But, if I could prevent an innocent being killed, I would pull the trigger, even though I know that means counseling, possible criminal and civil repercussions, and far more, for years.

So, your thoughts?

Please follow and like us: