Curing the symptom

It seems to me that the liberal left’s solution to every problem is to try to cure the symptoms rather than the disease, and the further to the left they lean, the more kooky their solution. For instance, in the case of communists, their solution is to outlaw thoughts that don’t fit their ideals. People like Bill Nye think that others should be jailed, for example, for failing to believe in global warming. Or the so-called “antifascist” rioters, who believe they have the right to beat others because they look like they don’t agree.

So when an event happens, it appears to be the knee-jerk reaction of the left to want to eliminate not the cause of the problem, but rather the instrument.

For instance, the mass shootings that occurred during the last presidential administration. The former president would surround himself with the families of the victims of the shooting, like human shields, and demand more gun control. Hollywood liberals with their “Demand a Plan” video, while continuing to make violence (and gun violence) soaked movies. All the while, ignoring many of the root causes for the problem.

I have spoken with several police officers, and the vast majority of gun violence stems from only a few causes. One is the fact that it is politically incorrect to institutionalize those with mental issues. We have turned into a “Jetsons society,” where we are convinced that anything can be cured by a pill. Just watch television for an hour. You can get a miracle pill to cure the symptoms of obesity, ED, diabetes, whatever malady you may be suffering from. So instead of institutionalizing a mentally ill patient, they are given a handful of pills and sent on their way. It is up to them whether they take the pills or not. They can take them, then stop, which is what generally happens. This is reportedly what happened to the Sandy Hook shooter. Add to that the fact that most of these mass shootings occur in gun free zones, areas that already espouse the liberal ideal of “no guns, no how, no where.”

So instead of trying to work at fixing the underlying societal problems, the left blurs the lines, calling right wrong and wrong right, muddying the waters, trying to erase gender, race, and anything else that makes us unique. Not trying to help us get along better, but trying to say that men can identify as women and vice versa, regardless of their genes, or that a black woman can identify as a white man. A black “passing” as a white would have been lynched by these same Democrats 60 years in the past.

Meanwhile, they blame the instrument used to commit violence. First it was guns. Now, because “immigrants” are using vehicles to hurt/maim/kill innocent bystanders, a group of Swedish leftists want to ban cars in cities. They don’t want to vet immigrants coming into the country, they immediately blame the instrument that is used to perpetrate the violence. And then, almost worse than the attack itself, the liberals use the tragedy to push their leftist agenda. In the words of Chicago mayor, Rahm Emmanuel, “never let a tragedy go to waste.”

So what happens when this “ban it” mindset is carried to it’s logical conclusion? Basically, anything we can touch, grasp, hold, or use can be used as a weapon. Thus, they will have to be banned. Knives, rocks, sticks, you name it. Or we could work on the causes of the problem…A far more challenging way to go about things, but has a longer lasting effect on society than trying to band-aid the symptoms.

Just keep beating that dead horse…

Here we are, 68 days into Donald Trump’s presidency, and it seems as though the pace is moving very well. So, why then, do people try to live in the past?

I’m not talking about any specific party. I’m talking about people who continue to complain about Obama, those who post about Trump’s missteps during the campaign, the messages about the random celebrity who said this or that. All things that were reported on ad nauseam, either positively or negatively.

You still see birthers blathering on about Obama’s birth certificate. You still see meme’s about Will Smith saying that Trump supporters should leave the country. The list goes on and on. And why?

Well, since you’re still here reading this then you care what I think, so I’ll tell you what I believe. I believe that there are people who can’t handle being happy or content. There are people who love the misery of hatred. It’s these people who have no real argument or debate, so they just push their vitriol on others any chance they get.

These are the same people who tend to be uneducated, and speak in very small words while name calling in an effort to make themselves feel superior. They’re buzz words when trying to debate are “moron” and “stupid” and “idiot” and … The list goes on.

I used to waste my time trying to talk sensibly with them, only to find that it was a lesson in futility. I don’t do this any longer, which probably gives those individuals a sense of victory. A sense that they have stuck it to their enemy. It probably also reinforces their belief in whatever tired diatribe their spewing. Unfortunately, the negative effects of this aren’t enough for me to continue to put myself through the headache of trying to convey my position in an intuitive manner to someone who is incapable of logical or rational thought.

I am somewhat exhausted; I wonder how a battery feels when it pours electricity into a non-conductor?― Arthur Conan Doyle, The Adventure of the Dying Detective

It’s all about the checks and balances…

You know, the more that I study the Constitution, the more I know that the Founding Fathers were inspired by God. The Constitution has a system of checks and balances was an inspired move on their part.

Let me give a short Civics lesson. There are three branches of government — The Legislative branch, the Judicial branch, and the Executive branch. Each of these “checks” the other two branches, and keeps one branch from getting too powerful.

The Legislative branch (Congress) introduces a law, and votes on it. If the law passes both houses, then it is sent on to the President, who is the head of the Executive branch. The President, can then either sign the bill into law or veto it, at which point it returns to Congress. They can, if they have enough votes, override the veto, or they can modify the bill, vote on it again, and send it back to the President’s desk.

Once signed into law, the Judicial branch can review the new law and compare it with the laws already on the books, up to and including the Constitution. The law can be argued against precedents of current case law, and the losing side can appeal up to, and including the Supreme Court of the United States.

Well, in waltzes senator Kamala Harris, democrat from California. She say she cannot support Judge Neil Gorsuch’s appointment to the Supreme Court, because he follows the law. Wait, what? She said

Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, the civil rights hero who argued Brown and inspired my career, once bluntly defined his judicial philosophy, saying, “You do what you think is right and let the law catch up.” In simple terms, Justice Marshall appreciated that the ultimate goal of the law was justice. By stark contrast, Judge Gorsuch has consistently valued narrow legalisms over real lives. I must do what’s right. I cannot support his nomination.

So a judge should ignore the law, and do what is “right”? What do you consider right, Senator? While I suspect that you would be fine with a judge legislating from the bench as long as he or she were legislating in the direction of your viewpoints, you and those of your ilk would howl, frothing at the mouth, your indignance, if judges started legislating with a conservative bent. Besides, are you not part of the Legislative branch? Are you so not willing to do your job that you are willing to abdicate your responsibilities to others? They why are you in the position?

I think Senator Chuck Grassley had the best analogy of the job of a judge, and specifically the gravity with which Judge Gorsuch does his job:

He’s a guy who I think comes to the court every day on the 10th circuit wearing a referee’s jersey – not trying to wear a Broncos versus a Packers jersey – and that’s what you need in a judge.

This is what we need on the Supreme Court. Not ideologues, not those who use the bench as a bully pulpit to force their agendas on the American people. We need referees, not the backup quarterback from one team, or the middle linebacker from the other. And IMHO, anyone in any member of the government who believes differently should be out of a job. Run the government the way the founding fathers intended and stop trying to get around the checks and balances.

Attention, purveyors of manufactured outrage

Over the past several years, but even moreso over the past few months, people, and so it seems to me, people on the left side of the aisle, have focused on manufacturing outrage. It seems that anything that doesn’t agree with their narrative is racist, sexist, islamophobuc, or whatever. I read an article the other day where a “transgender feminist” who said people  who are attracted to only one gender should be labeled as “transphobic.” In this person’s world view, if you are a straight male, who prefers “women without penises” then you are transphobic.

Okay, let me get this straight. First, women with penises? Last time I checked women don’t have penises. If they did, they would be called men. And if you insist on wearing women’s clothes, then you are what we called confused when I was younger… Second of all, who is this person to call me names because of my preference? We saw a similar occurrence a couple of weeks ago with the Pioneer Woman. She has a cooking show on the Food Network, and she said that her husband preferred hot wings to Asian wings, and the liberal left lost it’s mind and started calling her a racist. Because manufactured outrage.

Which is the entire point of my little missive today. The first point is something I want people to understand…You cannot give offense. Offense can only be taken. Think about it. If someone tries to offend you, and you choose not to be offended, then there is no offense. But if someone does something, regardless of how innocent (like mentioning that your husband’s tastebuds prefer heat to Asian flavors), and you feel insulted about it, then you pick up that mantle of offense. You take offense.

In other words, the choice to be offended is a choice that the recipient makes. Just like blacks will call each other n-word (I don’t want to garner offense) all the time, but they don’t take any offense to it, but if, for instance, a white police officer shoots a black perpetrator, it is clearly a case of racism. Liberal black people everywhere take offense. But then again, if it turns out that the officer was black (or if they encounter a narrative-breaking black conservative), then that person is not black enough.

Recently, a woman who has been flying a Blue Lives Matter flag for years in honor of her father, a police officer, was sent a letter by her homeowner’s association, requesting her to to take it down, because the flag was “racist, offensive and anti-Black Lives Matter.” This is exactly what I mean by manufactured outrage. Because I am doing something that doesn’t fit the left’s narrative, they feel perfectly justified to start name calling. And what does “anti-Black Lives Matter” mean? You can’t be pro police and pro black people? Not unlike the college dean that said “all lives matter” then was forced to recant it. Because if you think that all lives matter, then you are obviously a racist.

Another recent jewel from the liberal left is that milk is racist. Something about the USDA recommended daily allowance for calcium is for white kids, who have less calcium in their bones than black or Hispanic kids so the allowance is a result of white privilege…Or something. When I first heard it, I thought it was because milk is white and that is racist…But if you prefer chocolate milk,  then that is cultural appropriation, and that’s racist too. Man, I wish you could see the epic eye roll that resulted from reading that. You can’t make this stuff up, and I feel the need to wear an Ace bandage and a motorcycle helmet to keep my head from exploding sometimes.

And why is it that the left feels the need to stomp on my rights in order to feel better about themselves? They don’t want me having guns because it makes them feel uncomfortable. They don’t want me to be able to fly a flag because they label it as racist. They want to control what you say, what you do, how you think.

There is another aspect to manufactured outrage. The Urban Dictionary defines manufactured outrage as

A falsified righteous outrage at things that are basically unimportant and meaningless, frequently employed by politicians, political activists, or the media.

The emphasis is that they use manufactured outrage as a distraction from important matters. Like the way the former president surrounded himself with victims of Sandy Hook, using them, in effect, as human shields, while he and the liberal left tried to steal our Second Amendment rights.

I urge people not to give in to manufactured outrage. Keep your sights on the important things, and don’t be distracted by inconsequentials.

I believe you’re wrong, Mr. President…

As a quick follow-up to my previous post, I just watched the president’s statements surrounding the failure. I find it ridiculous to blame the democrats for the failure of the healthcare debacle. This is a failure of the GOP, entirely. There was more than one plan put forward that would have helped greatly, but instead the establishment representatives in the GOP backed the Ryan bill.

That bill, as stated previously, was a travesty. It was known for some time it wouldn’t pass. It’s worth saying again that congress is defunct, on both sides, and has been that way for some time. If nothing changes in short order, the GOP will see the same losses in 2018 that the democrats saw after passing the ACA.

I’m also hugely disappointed in Trump. I feel that he’s rolling over. I don’t care what he says about “letting it blow up”, it’s his job to work for the people and simply placing blame and moving on is the easy way out. That is not how a leader gets things done. It’s also not a “win” for the American people. Very disappointed indeed.

This is going to be a big mistake…

So, today the Affordable Care Act (ACA/Obamacare) replacement bill died.

I’m still digesting it. It wasn’t unexpected, there were a lot of clues leading up to this with all of the in-fighting, all of the disagreement of keep and amend vs repeal and replace, but I’m surprised none the less. I’m surprised that after  7 years the establishment candidates within congress were incapable of presenting intelligent legislation that not only stops the massive negative impact of the current bill, but also improves upon the positive aspects. At the very least they could have repealed it entirely to stop the bleeding. That is what the people wanted. The people spoke numerous times, through no less than 3 elections.

Instead, our government, and more pointedly the GOP, has proven that they are defunct. This has been relatively apparent for the past few years, but seems to be getting exponentially worse. They are the reason that our previous president spoke about having a phone and a pen, and they are the reason why there is quite a bit of unrest throughout the country today.

Maybe it’s by design. Maybe it’s because they want the country at odds with each other to keep from having any real focus places on their inefficacy. Distraction can be a powerful tool.

I think that they’re probably underestimating what happened during the last election, and are in for a rude awakening in 2018. As I see it, the people spoke loudly with the “tea party” movement, and started by giving the house to the GOP. The subsequent election yielded the senate. All the while, the GOP said that it was the presidents fault. What they neglected to see, or maybe they don’t care, is that the entire time more and more people started paying attention. Now they have the house, the senate, and the presidency, and the expectation is that they will “get things done”.

Healthcare was a major factor in how people voted. This isn’t a secret, the people have spoken out many times. Think about it, the first loss that came about was after the ACA was signed into law against the will of the majority of the country. It’s with this in mind that I believe their decision to not take this seriously was a big mistake. I believe they will reap what they’ve sown and will be losing seats in the upcoming election.

That is, of course, if they don’t get themselves together and start performing. There is still time. Yes, I’ve talked about the 2018 elections, but we’re only 3 months into 2017 so there’s still time. I’m not optimistic, and don’t hold out much hope. I’ve simply been burnt too many times. Nonetheless there is still time.

Inside of every problem lies an opportunity. – Robert Kiyosaki

Media matters? Not so much, methinks

Yeah, it’s time for another mainstream media rant…

Yesterday, the Washington Post put up a story by Caitlin Dewey with the headline

Immigrants are now canceling their food stamps for fear that Trump will deport them

The headline was subsequently changed to read

Immigrants are going hungry so Trump won’t deport them

Apparently, the Post thinks that the updated headline makes Trump look like a cold and heartless president. However, both of those headlines are guilty of a sin of omission, and I think their willingness to change the headline to one as negative as possible against President Trump, shows that it was an intentional omission. The word they ignored was Illegal…as in “Illegal immigrants are now canceling their food stamps for fear that Trump will deport them”

So, aside from the fact that the WaPo is trying their dead level best to impugn Trump’s good name, they are also ignoring the fact that illegal immigrants should not even be getting food stamps. They are not paying taxes, because they are illegal, they also should not be getting public assistance. In fact, for the SNAP program (which is what food stamps are called these days), the guidelines state,

To be eligible for SNAP benefits, households must also meet other conditions in addition to the income and resource requirements, such as everyone in your household having, or have applied for, a social security number.

So illegals should not be able to get SNAP benefits. But that fact is completely ignored by the Post. As is the fact that anyone who is here legally does not have to worry about being deported. They have paperwork stating that they are here legally. The only ones that have to worry are the ones that shouldn’t be here in the first place. But that doesn’t fit the (false) narrative that the administration is made up of monsters, completely ignoring the core facts of the problem. Illegal aliens on public assistance, taking more from our economy than they are putting back in.

The second piece of fake news is the fact that CNN is reporting that Sean Hannity, in a fit of rage, drew a pistol on Juan Williams and brandished it at him during an off-camera argument. Now according to Hannity and Williams, it didn’t happen. Hannity, a noted gun safety advocate who holds concealed carry permits in 5 states, says he was showing the pistol to Williams. It was unloaded and every precaution was taken to ensure it was safe. Even though both principals denied the claim, CNN’s Dylan Byers responded in a tweet,

I stand by my reporting, Sean.
— Dylan Byers (@DylanByers) March 17, 2017

Because to the liberals, smearing conservatives and spreading fake news (and this is my blog, CNN…Let’s see your technical difficulties take it down) is far more important than the facts of the story. Nice going, CNN.

And the final piece of fake news comes to us because a liberal activist was so desperate to smear the President that he paid $9000 for documents proving that  ExxonMobil had secretly bribed the president to nominate Rex Tillerson as his secretary of state. The documents proved to be false, however, the activist was still out the money, which reminds me of the adages that a fool and his money are soon parted and P.T. Barnum’s saying that there is a sucker born every minute. Especially, apparently, a sucker with an agenda and a desperate need to validate themselves by destroying those who don’t agree with them. What happened to inclusivity?

Unintended consequences…

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, castaway on some remote island with no access to media, or have some other reason for not interacting with society, you’ve seen the bathroom gender issue rear its ugly head. You know the one I’m talking about, where it has been ordered that a person can use the bathroom of the gender that they identify with.

To be clear, I believe that this was nothing more than an desire to receive special recognition. Prior to all the hubbub, I’m certain that I’ve used the bathroom with gay people. There’s even the likelihood that I’ve shared the bathroom with a transgendered person. I know that my wife and daughter have experienced the same. All without any unwanted advances or altercations, and all without the need of a new law or special recognition.

You see, prior to the latest manufactured outrage, the bathroom was simply a place to do your business, and any outwardly creepy person (of either gender) would be reported. People who identified as a man and even remotely looked like a man used the men’s room. People who identified as a woman and even remotely looked like a woman (and sometimes not really) used the ladies room. No muss, no fuss, no harm, no foul.

Fast forward to today. The Indiana legislature is now putting forth legislation requiring people to utilize the bathroom of the gender on their birth certificate. Prior to this there was, as far as I know, no law that said you had to utilize any specific bathroom. Now I will say that this does not account for schools and their policies where children and their genders are pretty well known, but I’ll leave that for a separate discussion as I believe that goes far beyond simple bathroom use.

So, what you have here is an unintended consequence. Where prior to pushing for the special recognition you had the ability to do exactly what you wanted as long as you weren’t a moron, and now (assuming the legislation passes and moves through the states) you’ll be actually breaking a law. Is that the outcome they sought? I don’t think so.

I’m sure that the 15 minutes of fame was worth actually impacting people who simply wanted to live their lives. I don’t think they’d agree, but then again it was never your point to help them, was it?

Without reflection, we go blindly on our way, creating more unintended consequences, and failing to achieve anything useful. – Margaret J. Wheatley

Is this who you want educating your kids?

As time goes on, things that the liberals do surprise me less and less. That should be disturbing, as they sink to new lows.

Today I read that New York state is planning to scrap a teacher literacy test. So in order to be a teacher right now, you have to have a handle on the basics of the English language. But NY state wants to abandon that test because — wait for it — racism.

Let’s take that to it’s logical conclusion. Do you want a surgeon that cannot pass med school because it’s “racist”? Would you want a lawyer who couldn’t or didn’t want to pass the bar to defend you when you committed your own special crime? What about your mechanic? I know a guy who had a button that said “I couldn’t fix your brakes, so I made your horn louder.” Is that really the direction that these liberal states want to go? I guess it does kind of dovetail with socialism. Socialism says that “anybody can have anybody else’s stuff, because we are all equal, whether you earned it or not,” while this is “anybody can be anything they want regardless of their qualifications.”

This is my personal opinion…Qualification trumps gender/race/religion based identity politics. I understand “affirmative” action, and, like unions, maybe it had it’s place in the past. But today, it has mainly devolved into groups of people trying to take advantage of the system. Want to teach my kids? Learn the english language, and whatever area you are planning on teaching, whether math or science, or whatever. If you cannot pass basic literacy in these areas, then you have no business facing a class in the classroom.

The liberal “do as I say, not as I do” ethos

You know, my late grandmother used to say “keep your words soft and sweet, for someday, you may have to eat them.” (She also said “want in one hand and pooh in the other, and see which one fills up first,” but that is a completely different blog entry…)

In any case, the liberals have once again verbally shot themselves in the foot. “Comedienne” and political “thinker” (she’s not funny, and I don’t think she’s thinking) Samantha Bee, decided to rail on a picture of a young man whom she called out as having “Nazi hair.” It turns out that said young man, Kyle Coddington, had his hair cut in that fashion, because he has stage 4 brain cancer. Luckily, his sister called Bee out on her insensitivity and use of him as a prop to fit her liberal narrative (without, I might add, stopping to consider or investigate the facts). Bee subsequently apologized, but like my grandmother said, she should have watched her words. And then there was the Muslim-American that was savagely beaten and left bleeding and unconscious on the streets of Berkeley because the Mob thought he looked like a conservative. So now mob justice is a thing…? And in the home of the free thought movement? Does the left not get the concept of irony?

incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result
a technique of indicating, as through character or plot development, an intention or attitude opposite to that which is actually or ostensibly stated.

Meanwhile, the left has some of the thinnest skin around.  They play the race card, the sex card, the nazi card, and whatever else they can at every opportunity. For instance, they have declared anything that doesn’t immediately help their cause to be racist…Mathematics is racist, the Electoral College is racist (and sexist), grammar is racist, all because reasons. I was waiting for them to declare racism as racist. I didn’t have to wait long…

Over at the Journal of Applied Philosophy, we’re told that condemning racism is — wait for it — racist.

Now forgive me if I seem dense, but doesn’t this make liberals, who so enjoy calling everything under the sun “racist” huge racists and hypocrites themselves? I’m now waiting for declaring something racist to be sexist and vice versa. That is the calculus of liberal logic. Soft and sweet, folks…Soft and sweet.

However, at the same time, they feel it is their obligation to take every cheap shot at anyone who they think disagrees with their views. And more than once, their own people were on the receiving end of their tirades and even violence. And sometimes it is the innocent bystander with “Nazi hair”…And stage 4 brain cancer…And sometimes (more often than you are willing to admit), it is the minority that you hold up to ostensibly prove your point, but whom you have turned into a caricature to prove that point.

To our friends on the left, I give this advice: keep your words soft and sweet. Because you have been eating an awful lot of them recently. Here is my nickel’s worth of free advice: Be nicer and more decent. Live up to your liberal talking points. Accept all viewpoints, not just the ones that agree with yours, embrace peace and love and tolerance. Talk to those who have differing opinions. You may find out they have a reason for feeling the way they do, which just might cause you to rethink your position. People are not automatically wrong because their viewpoints differ from yours.

Turns out my grandmother was right.