The Trouble With Trump
Donald Trump attends the Hank’s Yanks 1st Annual Golf Classic at Trump Golf Links on Monday, July 6, 2015, in New York. (Photo by Greg Allen/Invision/APhttp://rack.1.mshcdn.com/media/ZgkyMDE1LzA3LzIzL2E5L0RvbmFsZFRydW1wLmYyMjJhLmpwZwpwCXRodW1iCTk1MHg1MzQjCmUJanBn/291253b0/6f3/Donald-Trump-1.jpg
I have always considered conservatism to be the political philosophy of the thinking man. We don’t vote on a whim. We research the issues and vet our candidates. Most of us are people who hold ourselves to high moral principles, and we expect the same from our elected representatives. That’s what makes the popularity of Donald Trump so ironic. I understand that Conservatives are tired of the Washington status quo. Tired of Republican politicians who talk a good line and promise what ever to get elected and then don’t deliver. We are disgusted with the disingenuousness of political correctness and long for someone with enough chutzpa to stand up and speak the truth. Donald Trump is not that man.
We’ve all known that the left has its low information voters, people who are not motivated to delve into a candidate’s record, or history. Uncomfortable with the concept of personal responsibility, wallowing in perpetual victimhood, this constituency will vote for the candidate who seems most capable of providing a life free from worry or want. The progressive movement depends on these suckling lambs and leads them, like a herd, to the polls every election. Unfortunately Conservatism also has its useful idiots. People who vote based on emotion. They’ll choose the candidate who says what they want to hear, no mater his background. Trump appeals to these people. A consummate entertainer, Trump knows how to work an audience for maximum response. An inveterate attention whore, he thrives on working an audience into a frenzy. Trump paints himself as a Washington outsider, but from the ham-fisted attempt at quoting scripture at Liberty University, his way of pandering to whatever crowd he encounters, to his passive aggressive style of attacking his opponents, The Donald has proven that he is a very skilled politician. What he is not, is a statesman. Arrogant and petulant, he has at times behaved like a spoiled toddler or a playground bully. While many praise his outspokenness, there is a difference between being politically incorrect and being crass and vulgar. Trump does not know this difference; he says the first thing that pops into his mind however outlandish. No world leader would take him seriously.
Conservatives want a President who understands basic economics. One who will press for a balanced budget and get our fiscal house in order. But is Trump really the type of businessman for the job? Unlike businessmen like Herman Cain or Mitt Romney, who have a history of taking failing businesses, making the tough cuts and restoring them to solvency, Trump is a real-estate speculator. He takes investors money, or takes out loans, then sinks that money into risky ventures. Many times it has paid off big, making him millions, but it has also landed him in bankruptcy four times. Is this really the kind of businessman we want in charge of our tax dollars?
As for his Conservative credentials, Trump is hard to pin down. He has a history of donating to whatever candidate he could get the most use out of whether they were Liberal or Conservative. He donated to Hillary Clinton and Rahm Emanual to name a few. He didn’t make these donations because he believed in these politicians, no, he donated for favors. This is exactly the kind of cronyism that makes our representatives so unresponsive to the needs of the people who elect them. Trump has used the very system that is the biggest problem in Washington. He has supported then unsupported an assault weapon ban, and a single payer health care system. While it might be possible that he has had a change of heart about these issues, the fact that many of the changes are recent, leads one to question whether this is genuine, or just pandering for the Conservative vote.
We slam Ted Cruz because of a couple of campaign faux pas; we don’t trust Marco Rubio because he was part of the Gang of Eight. We scrutinize every facet of the other candidates. But just like Obama, for whom none of his numerous offenses seem to stick, we have simply chosen to overlook all the vast and varied reasons why Donald Trump is the wrong person to be the Republican nominee.
We have let this circus go on far too long. The stakes are far too high. The very future of our once great nation and our way of life are at stake. So confident of his chance of winning, the Donald will most assuredly run as an Independent if he doesn’t get the Republican nomination. This will fracture the Conservative vote, and hand the White House over to a Liberal Crone or a died in the wool Socialist. True Conservatives hoped we would be able to have a real leader, someone we could whole-heartedly support, instead of voting for the lesser of two evils. Looks like we will be disappointed again
Share this:
The Middle-aged Housewife’s Guide to Political Correctness.
Latin Dictionary wikimedia.org
There are a lot of terms used by politicians and the media that may not mean what we think they mean. Political correctness is after all, an exercise in deception. Below is an attempt to cut through the crap and define what these often used words and phrases really mean.
- Amnesty: As it pertains to the illegal immigration debate, amnesty has three different meanings. To those favoring open borders, amnesty means that every illegal alien residing in the United States has a right to stay regardless of his circumstances or behavior. To these people, amnesty is a good thing. To those favoring closed borders, allowing anyone who comes over illegally to stay, regardless of his circumstances or behavior is considered to be amnesty. To these people, amnesty is a bad thing. To the politician, amnesty is a term to be avoided and the term “limited path to citizenship” is preferred. This means that certain illegal aliens who meet prescribed criteria will be allowed to stay while they seek citizenship. How difficult these criteria are to meet depends on how far to the right or left the politician is.
- Women’s Health Issues (aka “Reproductive Rights”): These are blanket terms covering many existing and proposed regulations, serving the purpose of giving women complete sexual freedom, unburdened by consequence, at no out of pocket cost to her.
- Raising Awareness: A Liberal Progressive device that allows a person to obtain the self-satisfaction of addressing a problem or issue without expending any substantial sacrifice of time, money, or resources. The act of “Raising Awareness” is not actually meant to solve the problem, but to deflect the solving of the problem to others who are now “aware” of it.
- Creating a Dialog: Another misleading Liberal Progressive device designed to instill guilt and contrition while masquerading as an open discussion.
- Racism: This term explains that any and all misfortunes incurred by non-whites are the result of the attitudes and ignorance of whites. This term has gained popularity because addressing the attitudes and behaviors of non-whites is difficult and not politically expedient.
- White Privilege: This is the idea that white people, by virtue of the color of their skin, and not because of attitude, work ethics, morals, or economic factors, are magically granted all types of social and economic advantages.
- Unequal Wealth Distribution: Another “divide and conquer” Liberal Progressive device. Those who favor the redistribution of wealth, are motivated by several misconceptions. All wealth is a finite resource unfairly accumulated and horded by a select few at the expense of the majority. Most wealthy persons have obtained their wealth by unfairly exploiting the poor. Once you reach a certain wealth threshold, you no longer have the right to the fruits of your labor. Hard work, ingenuity, and wise choices do not matter, the poor are not able to obtain wealth on their own because the wealthy game the system to keep the poor and middle class down.
Share this:
To My Friends Outside My Police Family: This is Why We Can’t Stop Talking About It.
Sometimes it seems that the only thing Liberals and Conservatives have in common is their mutual mistrust of LEO’s
You may be my friend in real life. You might just be someone who knew me when I was a child. Maybe we grew up together and we follow each others life through social media. You see pictures of my child and I get to watch as you navigate your way through life. You see my status messages that talk about how my family and I just took our 3 year old to the park or that my husband was just promoted at work. Maybe you witness a birth announcement or the death of a family member as you look upon my life via a social media platform. Either way, I have, for some reason or another, chosen to allow you to be a part of it.
You know I’m a police wife or a police husband. Maybe I’m even an officer and we’re friends outside of my job. You…
View original post 856 more words
Share this:
2014 in review
The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2014 annual report for this blog.
Here’s an excerpt:
A San Francisco cable car holds 60 people. This blog was viewed about 370 times in 2014. If it were a cable car, it would take about 6 trips to carry that many people.
Click here to see the complete report.
Share this:
Stop the Insanity
Last night justice was served. The Grand Jury in Missouri demonstrated once again that a jury of randomly selected private citizens could to look objectively at the facts and reach an unbiased decision. Over the past few years we have had several high profile cases where the verdict was not what the public expected or even wanted. These cases do not show a broken justice system. They demonstrate that the system is working as intended. Juries should not be swayed by raw emotions and threats of violence. They should only judge a case by the facts presented. This is exactly what happened here. It is a comfort to know that an overarching media that now seeks to shape the truth, rather than it’s intended purpose of simply reporting the truth, does not have the power to influence a verdict after all. Darren Wilson’s no bill verdict does not only exonerate him, but his profession as well. So ingrained in the black community is the perception that young black men are gunned down with impunity by the police, that nothing short of a public lynching of a police officer will convince them that our justice system works. Factual evidence is ignored, replaced by conclusions only proven by emotion. The attorneys for Michael Brown’s parents felt that the verdict was not in their favor because of the way the evidence was presented, that the tone of voice and verbal inflections were what persuaded the jury rather than the preponderance of the evidence. Because Grand Jury proceedings are held in secret we cannot know what verbal nuances were used. But we can know how carefully placed emphasis and verbal inflections in the way the mainstream media reported this story, influenced public opinion against Darren Wilson. Black parents worry about what will happen to their children when they have an encounter with the police. The solution is to teach them not to engage in behaviors were they will have such encounters. We hear so much about making the system fair and holding officers accountable. But who is holding young black men accountable? Where are the black leaders who are working to strengthen black families, and encourage young black men to take responsibility for the children they father? Where the politicians who are working to bring jobs and educational opportunities to black neighborhoods? Where are the rap artists, athletes and celebrities that condemn, theft, rape, drug addiction, and assault instead of glorifying it? Who is teaching black children the self reliance, self respect and respect for authority necessary to succeed in civil society? It is a tragic truth that young black men are in danger. But that danger is more from other black men than by the police. No parent should have to live with that kind of worry, but the solution must begin at home.
Share this:
What’s In a Name?
Homophobe, Islamaphobe, intolerant, racist, bigot, woman-hater, backward, ignorant, redneck, cracker. If you are a white, Christian, Conservative, you have probably been called at least one of those words, or something worse. Here’s a word for those who are quick to throw out the aforementioned terms, hypocrite.
I don’t know about you, but I am getting weary with being told what I think and how I feel from people who have no idea who I am or what I stand for. People who are content to be told by the entertainment industry what to think, not how to think. People who are too quick to believe what they are told, by a media more concerned with pushing a social agenda, than seeking the truth.
I watch everyday, on the news, on the web, and I am astonished that people blame racism, and bigotry in all its forms when they are faced with the consequences of their behaviors. Common sense and civility have been driven from the public square, and I shake my head and wonder, at what point did the Bill of Rights, specifically the First Amendment, become so twisted and perverted that it is now the instrument by which I am stripped of the very rights it was meant to preserve?
Conservatism has always been about protecting the rights of the individual. Every individual, no matter what your personal philosophy. In spite of the picture painted of us, Conservatism is about compassion and compromise, within a framework of self-determination and personal responsibility. It is clear now however, that the Progressive movement, in spite of the narrative pushed for it, is not about compromise, it is about control.
Share this:
9/11 My Thoughts
Every generation has it’s defining moments. Those events where you can remember where you were and what you were doing at that time. I can remember three such events during my lifetime, the moon landing, the Challenger explosion,… 9/ 11. I know we all have our recollections of that day. Here are mine.
We were stationed at RAF Lakenheath, in England at the time. There were two other bases nearby and we were living in the housing units just outside of one of those bases. The circular street, called a close, had about twenty-five, neat brick houses surrounded by a fence. It was just outside of the main gate of RAF Feltwell, just outside of a village with the same name.
“G” was taking his nap and I turned on the TV to CNN. It was nearly two o’clock in the afternoon. I watched what I thought was a report about a terrible airline accident. Then, live on the TV I watched as a second airliner circled around and crashed into the South Tower. As I sat transfixed watching the events unfold, it still hadn’t sunk in that this was a deliberate attack. Then came the crash at the Pentagon. I know at some point during this time I must have prayed. Prayers for the people at the Pentagon, prayers for the safety of my family and my husband’s family even though they were thousands of miles from New York and DC. And prayers for the people trapped inside a house of horrors as I watched through the TV screen as the South Tower collapsed. I knew life on base was about to get very complicated. My mind turned to some mundane thoughts. “Did I have enough milk and bread? What about diapers? Heaven forbid I run out of diapers.
It was just after three pm, school had just gotten out and “A” came rushing through the kitchen door. “Mom, I left my back pack on the play ground and we have to go back and get it.” “We’ll have to hurry before they lock the gates” I told her. “Why would they lock the gates? “ She asked, unaware of what had just happened. “I’ll tell you later.” I knew that any minute the base would be going into Threatcon Delta and if the base was locked down we might be stuck there for hours. I grabbed “G” and buckled him into his stroller, grabbed my purse and a couple of diapers, just in case. We ran a block to the street that separated the houses from the main gate of the base. As I showed the guard my ID, I asked him how long we had before he would be locking down. He gave me a strange look and said he wasn’t closing the gate. Obviously he didn’t know yet. We ran to the playground, found the backpack, then ran the couple of blocks back to the gate. We crossed the street just as the guard pulled the big iron gates, that would block vehicles from coming on to the base, closed with a loud clang.
Why did we have to run? Why did they close the gates? How do you tell an eight-year-old child that we are at war and maybe in danger? I had to be straightforward. “A” would not accept a half-truth. We sat down and watched as the events continued to unfold on the TV. Some people thought that it was wrong to let a child see the coverage. But I have never lied to my children even when the news might be hard to bear. The phone rang. It was the hubs calling to say he would be home late. “I know,” I said. Then hung up the phone. I know at sometime during the evening I called my family. Even though I knew they were fine, I need to hear it from them, and “A” needed to know that they were OK.
The next morning, the gates to our housing unit were locked. In front of the pedestrian gate where the kids would meet the lollipop lady that helped them across the road, was a Humvee with a .50 caliber machine gun on top. For the next three days we were locked in. Only the active duty military members were allowed in or out on their way to and from work. No school, and very little information about what we were supposed to do. This was new territory for us military spouses. Some kept their blinds closed, others kept their lights off after dark. The BX was closed, the Commissary was closed. After a few days the walls began to close in. We decided it was safe to let our kids play outside. Under the watchful eyes of the guard, we walked by the gate. There on the other side of the street in front of the entrance to the base was a mound of flowers. Our English neighbors showed their support in so many ways. The Queen even ordered that “The Star Spangled Banner” be played at the Changing of the Guard at Buckingham Palace. The only time another country has been so honored.
Slowly we settled in to what was now the “new normal”. The Humvee was replaced with a portable guard shack. The gates were open, but were filled with iron obstacles that resembled giant jacks. The kids having to show ID’s to the gate guard, the vehicle searches and the dogs became routine. As we once again returned to the villages we were often greeted with, “we’re so glad to see you out and about”. It wasn’t the greeting of shop owners, glad for the returning business; it was the kind of greeting you would give a friend who was finally outside after recovering from a serious illness.
The whole experience was surreal. As I went about my normal routine, it seemed somehow inappropriate to do so. After so many had lost their life, it seemed wrong to go to the market, to go out to eat or to the pub, or go to London to do some Christmas shopping. But carry on we did, because to do otherwise, was to let the terrorists win.
My most poignant memory of that time did not happen on 9/11 or the days following. It came several months later. “A” was learning patriotic songs in music class. In her backpack I found a paper the music teacher had given them, and this was what she had doodled on the page.
The patriotism, the pride, the tribute of an eight-year-old girl. There is hope for this country after all.
Share this:
Such a Time As This
We are truly living in an upside-down world. Faith, family, patriotism, and self-reliance, were once the moral bedrock of our society. Now, people who live by those precepts are seen as weak-minded, or eyed with suspicion. People of faith, and Christians in particular, are seen as anti-education and anti-science. Unable to think for themselves, they turn to an invented superstition to make up their minds for them. Women who choose to become single mothers* are heralded as trend setters. They are heroines who are breaking down the fettered bonds of matrimony. While women who choose to make the sacrifices necessary to have a loving marriage and a two parent household are seen as ignorant and dependent. Husbands and fathers are gleefully portrayed as abusive tyrants, or bungling buffoons. Those who love our country and the Constitution, those who are willing to fight and die for the freedoms we have left, are seen as dangerous revolutionaries. Backward crackpots who are worthy of suspicion and avoidance. Living by the consequence of your choices used to be a basic understanding, taught from childhood, but now millions of us are willing to trade our hard-won freedoms for a government controlled lifestyle. Free from worry or want, we neither know nor care how our lifestyle is funded and we are satisfied with mere subsistence.
We didn’t get this way overnight. There has been a slow eroding ever since the Communist Manifesto was published back in 1848. It kicked into high gear when the Baby Boomers came of age. It seemed for a brief period in the eighties that we had beaten back the hippies, but it didn’t last long. Now under the progressive control of the current administration, it looks like the Liberal Progressive movement might finally claim victory.
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need”. This quote, popularized by Karl Marx, doesn’t seem so wrong at a first look. After all, don’t those who have plenty have a moral obligation to help those in need? This would have made perfect sense to those living in early industrial Europe. Working class people who because of their social status, had no political power and were never truly allowed to prosper from their labor. Ironically, the Communist philosophy that sought to equal the field by eliminating private property and distributing it equally among everyone, could only work if that property and the division of labor were placed under the control of a limited number of individuals. These people would then dictate the balance of the labor force between manufacturing and agriculture. They would distribute resources as they saw fit. The Communist Manifesto that promised that every laborer would earn his subsistence from his labor, delivered only that. Everyone could survive, but no one, except those in control of the labor force, could prosper. The Proletariat would go from being controlled by the industrialists to being controlled by the government. This system of government that promised economic freedom, instead took all freedoms away.
In spite of the historically documented failure of Communism in every country where it has been tried, the Liberal Progressive still insists that governmental control produces a better standard of living than personal control. This is not what our Founding Fathers believed. The Founders sought to create a society where individuals controlled property and the government. There were no royalty, no titled gentry. Without government interference, every man was free to succeed, but he was also free to fail. In a free society, it is the risk of failure that compels the individual to better himself. The harder you work and the better you educate yourself, the lower the risk of failure becomes. To the liberal progressive, any risk of failure is unacceptable. It is better that no one prosper if it means that anyone might fail. Complete equity in the whole of society is the Liberal Progressive goal.
The most dangerous way this goal manifests itself is by the Liberal Progressive’s belief in moral relativity. There is no good or bad, no right or wrong. No lifestyle, personal choice, or belief system is better or worse than any other. The man who sits under a shade tree all day deserves his daily bread just as much as the man who toiled in the field all day to produce it. An Al Qaeda terrorist is just as much a freedom fighter as a Minuteman who fought in the American Revolution. Stealing from others is acceptable if they have more than you. The only evil the Liberal Progressive recognizes, is the discernment of evil. This is how a terrorist attack on an American military base can be called an act of workplace violence. It’s how Israel can be criticized for the heavy-handed defense of their country, while the brutal acts of the Palestinians against the Israelis, and even their own people, are ignored. It’s how a police officer can be labeled a racist murder with no evidence proving that is the case, while a young man, who moments before his death was robbing a convenience store, is lauded as a hero. It’s how an unborn child can be regarded as a parasite in its mother’s womb, and how mankind at large can be regarded as a parasite on the earth. It is this defective moral compass, that compels the President, a man steeped in Liberal Progressive ideology, practically from birth, to travel the world apologizing for the country he is supposed to lead. So warped is his thinking, that he truly believes that Islāmic terrorists are not evil, just misunderstood.
Perhaps the only truthful words uttered by this man, were his campaign promise to “Fundamentally change America”. It’s frightening how much he, and the Liberal Progressives have succeeded.
*This passage is not meant to include women who were abandoned, widowed, or escaping abusive situations.
Share this:
Parents, Nothing More Than an Untapped Resorce
School has started once again and now comes the pile of forms to be signed. Every year, my child brings home something called the “student, teacher, administrator, parent compact”. This pointless exercise in political correctness has a section where the administrator, the teacher and the student basically pledge to make the school a safe, respectful learning environment. These are not bad objectives, but it is silly to have students, parents, and teachers sign a nonbinding agreement. Here is this asinine waste of paper for your viewing pleasure.
There is a section of this compact where there is a list of things that I, as a parent of a student, pledge to do. I do not disagree with what the compact contains, but I do find it particularly insulting that the school board feels it has to remind me what my duties as a parent are.
Signing this paper is supposedly voluntary, but in the past, my child was denied a locker until he brought back the form. When I pointed out to the teacher that it stated on the form that it was voluntary, she said that she did not have the authority to make an exception and would take it up with the guidance councilor. Apparently the guidance councilor didn’t have the authority to apply what was written on the form either, and it took about two weeks before the principle called me and agreed that my child could have a locker. By then, all the lockers had been assigned.
If the school district is going to require us to sign a paper like this, it should be to explain what the school promises to do for the students and parents, rather than the emphasis being the other way around. Here’s what I would like to see this compact contain:
That the administrators promise to:
• Weigh the input of parents highly when making policy decisions, and choosing curriculum
• Recognize the parent as the final authority in decisions about what is best for a student.
• Understand that the school exists to meet the needs of the families it serves, not the other way around.
• To support teachers in their efforts to educate students by giving them the resources necessary to do the job, and by not burdening them with needless programs and procedures that may seem novel and innovative, but reduce the amount of time the teacher has to actually teach.
That the teachers promise to:
• Communicate regularly with the parents.
• Make themselves available in the classroom to answer questions.
• Suggest helpful resources for struggling students.
• Make sure that all students, who put forth the effort, understand the subject matter before moving on to the next thing.
The parents promise to:
• Communicate regularly with the student’s teachers.
• Pay attention to the educational materials and curriculum provided to the student.
• Be an advocate for their student to insure that the school system meets the individual needs of the student.
• Encourage the student to take advantage of tutoring, and other help offered by the school.
The students promise to:
• Respect the persons and property of other students.
• Respect the authority of the teachers and school officials.
• Ask questions when they don’t understand.
• Be prepared with the proper supplies.
• Discuss disagreements with school rules with their parents, then together approach school officials about it rather than simply breaking the rule in protest.
Share this:
Not Just Another Monday
This Memorial Day amid all the boat filled lakes, bikini filled beaches and back yard barbecues, many of us will take the time to stop and reflect on what this day is really about. We’ll pause and remember the courage and sacrifice of those who paid the ultimate price to preserve the rights and liberty this country enjoys. Rights it seems, that many in this country are willing to just throw away.
We like to plaster bumper stickers on our cars, and sport t-shirts proclaiming, “Support our Troops”. But are we making a real effort to support them? The VA hospital scandal, and the whittling away of our Veterans benefits are truly appalling. However, there is another way that many Americans have dishonored our Vets that maybe we have never considered.
When men and women join the military they take an oath. Not an oath to protect our government, an oath to protect and defend The Constitution of the United States of America. When we treat The Constitution as a “living” document, to be interpreted at whim, we reject the spirit of that oath. When we elect to office, people of questionable integrity, people who care more about their own power and glory than serving their constituents, we tell our Warriors that we do not care about the document they are sworn to defend. When, either through ignorance or indifference we elect government officials whose goal it is to turn our Capitalist, Republic into a Socialist Commune, we tell our military members that their sacrifices were in vain.
As citizens of this country, we all have an obligation to learn about our history, our Founders, and our Founding Documents. We have a responsibly to make wise and informed choices when we vote. And we have a sacred duty to only put into office those individuals who will truly “uphold and defend” The Constitution of the United States of America. To do less is to make the deaths of our bravest, and brightest meaningless.
