It is interesting watching, reading and listening to all the fervor surrounding Phil Robertson and A&E.  The aged redneck said something less than flattering about gays and the GLAAD community went high and to the right… or left shall we say.  A&E, an extreme leftist, over the top, pro-gay network, then indefinitely suspended the Robertson family patriarch for openly expressing his opinion that homosexuality was a sin.  This, perceived as a gross constitutional violation of 1st Amendment rights, caused conservatives to circle their wagons in defense of Robertson. Think Progress, a progressive website, published an article further stating that Robertson not only hates gays but also, is an avid racist who feels Blacks were better off before Jim Crowe Laws.  Interesting.

Okay, before we get too deeply into this, I must confess that I am partial to rednecks – to say that, “some of my best friends are rednecks,” would be a gross understatement.  Of course growing up as a youth in the poor, Black, northern inner city, I was taught that rednecks were almost a different species altogether.  They were a bizarre and racist people that hated all things beyond that of their own.  It is the way this new Modern Liberalism works – it preys upon ignorance.  Chances were that I would never evolve beyond that of the street life I was born into, let alone run into a redneck in order to be able to make any self-determinations.  And so, it was to be.

A few novella sized chapters of my life ago I joined the Navy and was shell shocked by the types of different people I met during training, but the true awakening came when I was sent to Millington, TN.  There is where I had my first true redneck encounter with a young man named Allan Stuart from Tyler, TX. (If memory serves me correctly.)  You must remember that at this time Allan and I both were only months removed from our homes.  I still had far more Philly street in me than I did military bearing and Allan was far more country than he was a Sailor.  Shortly after check-in, which was befouled by my own “misconduct,” I was assigned to watch on the Naval Hospital’s Information Desk.  There, I was teamed with a young, skinny kid whose accent was so strong I thought he was speaking a different language.  (For those of you who know him, yes, Allan was skinny once upon a time). 

Allan’s personality is larger than life and he was quick to share stories of his youth in a colloquial dialogue of idioms that could rival that of Samuel Clemens himself.  Conversations at first were difficult, not only was his accent thick, I had yet to be exposed to true southern lingo.  I could barely understand a word he said often interrupting with untimely, “huhs?” and “whats?” Of the first stories he shared was when he once took his father’s bullwhip and was heading off to play with it.  My liberal oriented mind quickly made a predetermination of where he was going with this story.  As it turned out, I was wrong.  His father caught him running off with the bullwhip and stopped him.  “Give that too me Allan.”  His father said before directing him to run across the yard.  No sooner than Allan hit full speed, a lesson teaching lightning bolt and thunderous crack ripped into his back.  His father, to teach him a firsthand a lesson about what the bullwhip actually represented, gave him a little taste.  And so, the stories continued to flow between the two of us for years to come.  Though worlds apart, and perhaps in the minds of most, an unlikely duo, especially in the Memphis area of TN, we found more similarities than differences in not only how we were raised, but also who we were as individuals and a true unbreakable friendship was born.  We would both leave Millington and go our separate ways to pursue different military opportunities. When I arrived in Yuma, what was to be my final duty station, I was recognized by Allan’s wife; even though I had never met her… or knew she even existed for that matter.  A friendship forced apart by military needs had endured a career’s worth of separation.  Allan had not changed.  Still bigger than life, deceivingly smart, rudely determined, hyper opinionated, highly driven, brutally honest and still his own person in spite of a liberal world that was determined to prejudge him and his type of people – Allan was still the same Allan I had met so many years earlier.  Now adult sized, but still enjoying a bizarre sense of individuality that allowed him to drive up to morning PT in a canary yellow Mustang GT blasting old school Chaka Khan and talking in Stu’s unmistakable southern drawl.  You cannot help but to love him once you meet him.  Allan, though a redneck in his own definition, yields but one accurate marker of what most think a redneck is; his accent - that while being most obvious, was least defining.

Nothing about Allen was or is how a redneck was described to be in the uber-liberal Philadelphian inner city.  Liberalism and its soft racisms of predetermination feed and perpetuate themselves vested largely on the stubborn ignorance of devout followers.  Chances were that I would have never made it off the streets and come to know the likes of Allan and so many others like him.  Had this been the case and I remained confined to the self-limiting liberal la la land, today I would likely take the words of Phil Robertson and based them on the misconceptions that liberalism deliberately ascribed to me.  What was omitted from those early conversations was the sometimes brutal honesty, loyalty and sense of faith driven integrity many people possess – some of which happen to be rednecks.

 Little different, I would later learn, than southern Blacks whose faith derived influences live on in even the most secular on northern inner city families were these so called rednecks.  While Allan I were quite different demographically, we were far more similar in terms of value systems.  Separated again by the changing tides of life, if I were to stumble across Allan today and he were down and out – without question he would be taken in and my home would be his.  As unlikely as we were said to be back in the day has little to do with who we, and people in general, actually are.  It is this loss of personal understanding coupled with a greater loss of our sense of humanity that contrives such predetermined and prejudicial disdain being levied against Robertson by GLAAD.

This is why I detest not the GLAAD agenda, but GLAAD’s methodologies.  What GLAAD now demands through such protests against the individual right to disagree, is that everyone embrace homosexuality.  Those who do not are now being attacked as GLAAD seeks to aggressively force their agenda of homosexual acceptance upon all people over the individual right to uphold their own personal beliefs.  The crime, to GLAAD, is simply to not support the homosexual community.  This overly aggressive position by GLAAD has forced them to continually misstep when seeking to persecute solely because someone within, or the gay community in general is not held in the highest of regard.   

In the “Stop the Hate, Free Kate” campaign, GLAAD sought to demonize all those who stood against Kate Hunt, a 17 year old high school teenager who was having sexual relations with a 14 year girl.  What GLAAD and the LGBT community advocates saw was a young gay person facing charges for “being gay,” but willfully overlooked her continued violations of court placed restraining orders and even tried to use politicians to legalize same sex relationships involving minors to circumvent statutory rape laws in the state of Florida. 

Continually we are told by GLAAD, its advocates and its moronic spokes people like Wilsin Cruz that conservatives “hate” and fail to possess constitutional understanding in ill-fated attempts to advance their own, and now clearly biased and even prejudicial, agenda.  Their recent attack on Chik-Fil-A not only resulted in record sales for the Christian oriented fast food chain, but GLAAD again tried to use leftist political entities to block Chik-Fil-A businesses from opening in areas that were controlled by liberals.  Yet, their insistence is that they, as liberals, support American freedoms and concepts of constitutionality – until someone disagrees with them that is.

The fact of the matter is gays wish to be accepted for being gay, which is fine.  The trouble arises when the community chooses to force their acceptance on all others and refusing to respect differing opinions even when those who choose to not support homosexuality wish no harm, nor act in a discriminatory manner against gays. 

Here is an interesting piece of trivia.  We as a nation, demand that immigrants seeking citizenship bear the responsibility to “Respect the rights, beliefs, and opinions of others.” It is a concept deeply vetted by the First Amendment’s protection of free speech and religious freedom.  Unfortunately, the most enshrouded Americans, American communities and American subcultures demand that their rights, beliefs and opinions be respected, but too often now, they refuse to bear the responsibility of respecting the same of others.  It is a dichotomy that the American progressive and liberal factions embrace to the highest and most absurd proportions.  Inasmuch, through their perverse sense of entitlement, GLAAD and many members of the otherwise rational LGBT community have taken giant steps backwards while only advancing the right to refute their belief system among those who tend to be impartial to their way of life, which is actually the majority of Americans.

It is not that I am “anti-Right” or anything like that, though I have matured enough politically to see the gross republican failings.  Hell, that would make me a Liberal… or even worse – an Independent!  “A far Right Conservative,” a very good friend more recently called me.  It was to say that I tend to be a bit unbending in my political perspectives; rigid and unforgiving – extreme even (which is what “far Right” means anymore).  Consider it a “slight of compliment” that was both fitting and at times appropriate. 

It was a comment that made me think

Place the emphasis of “far Right Conservative” on Conservative; i.e. not Republican is what was being stated.  (I like the sound of that – “Not Republican!” It would make a good blog or website theme these days).  I like Republicanism and the associated political ideologies, but before that, the political values of fiscal responsibility, individual freedom, constitutional rights, personal accountability, personal responsibility and limited government must be upheld.  Looking at my little checklist: Where do Republicans really fit in to my political value system?  In my opinion, Republican officials represent these values in terms of rhetoric only, not in practice.  They DO exist in Republican philosophy and mantra, but both current and more recent Republican leadership refuse to practice them.  Moreover, I see the Party for how it practices the art of American politicking, not how they wish to be perceived as practicing them.  And this is where I simply veer course from the “establishment Republican” – they either do not find such values as important as myself, or they simply refuse to see and accept the truth about what their Republican political leadership is actually doing.  It is not that they are bad people; it is just that I see things differently and am accordingly not blinded by party affiliations over personal values and common sense.  (Ahem, Not that all Republicans are).

I just don’t get it

Practically, everyone on the Right is fuming over Obama’s Executive Order essentially granting amnesty to illegal immigrants – and rightfully so.  What I don’t get is why the actively elected Right has called upon an out of office, professional President wannabe (with no active political decision making authority what-so-ever) to take the lead on the immigration issue.  Rather than effect active legislation, those HIRED TO SERVE IN OFFICE BY THE RIGHT have taken a roll of passivity while further relying on a moot political figure, solely because he is running for office.  Simply put, Romney is not in a position to right the unilateral wrong committed by Obama, nor is Romney in a position to dictate immigration policy.  Elected politicians, inept in their own individual political ability, have hid from the issue behind a Romney shield instead of taking action as they were hired by the people to do.  Yet, no one really seems to notice. 

For purposes of personal amusement, let’s take a quick glimpse on Romney and the Latino vote.

Romney’s presidential bid needs no less than 31% of the Latino vote AFTER Obama just rolled over, smiled and swallowed  and secured the Latino vote in a monumental way.  When pressed on whether he [Romney] would strike down the EO if elected President, he ducked, dodged and avoided answering.  [Should probably insert a note here that Romney’s avoidance means he will do nothing if elected].  Romney however, is not dumb, but he may be making a very stupid move to resolve the “immigration” conundrum he faces.

More of the same old thing

Have you noticed how the media consistently covered how “Obama deported more illegal Mexicans than Bush;” all while AZ was attacked for enforcing the same standard Obama was being given credit for?  Perhaps you may have noticed when Obama deportation numbers were being dropped in public view; ICE was granting amnesty.   This Democrat hypocrisy exists because MOST DEMOCRATS SUPPORT IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT, NOT AMNESTY.  Obama pandered to both sides of Liberal immigration temperament and then sealed the deal favoring the Latino vote over national sovereignty.  Suckers.

Here’s another little immigration conflict for ya!  Asians now stand to overtake Mexicans in immigration to the US.  If they (both Republicans and Democrats) have sold national sovereignty for the Latino vote to this extent; can you possibly imagine what they will be willing to do for the Asian vote once politicians decide to make Asians the next American race issue?  That is how they get the votes you know.  They make it look like anyone not of a specified race is wrong and racist for not being of that race and then promise they will make things different and better.  The whole time making it worse to have something to actually fix, then walking away - after the given ethic group has given them their blind loyalty that is.  If you are Black like me, that should sound all too familiar.  If you are Mexican, I hope you have been watching closely; you’re next.

Republican vetting against constitutionalism

Rubio is currently being vetted for the coveted VP slot.  Not a bad choice in terms of political perspectives, but one cannot help but wonder if this is merely a “Hey! I like Latino’s too!” move to counter traditionally low Latino support for Republican politicians in a time where the Latino vote could well be the deciding factor in the 2012 Presidential race.  Though obvious, this is not what makes it a potentially disastrous and stupid move. 

Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, has something in common with the good old Prez.  Rubio’s parents “held off” on become US citizens until such a time Marco had already earned dual citizenship.  (In case you have not noticed, the commonality is not the Cuban parent part….)  Please allow me to digress even further.

The Right hosed the “Birther” issue by attacking it the laziest way possible.  Challenged was “where Obama was born” because the Right felt that if it proved Obama was born in Kenya, it would be an open and shut case; WRONG!  They almost completely ignored the true issue in that Obama’s father gave him dual citizenship because he [Obama] was born of a father that claimed citizenship to a nation that extended its citizenship to those children of their citizens born abroad.  You see, it never matter “where” Obama was born per se, because the dual citizenship is where the constitutional argument lies; an argument more difficult in constitutional terms than that of Obama being born in a foreign nation.  Had Republicans taken the higher ground, the “birther” conspiracy would have held the merit it truly deserved.  The average American of course, does not know this and the majority of those whom do possess the apathy of those worthy of following only.  Be that as it may, constitutional eligibility has been brought back to the forefront by Republicans; incorrectly, but nonetheless by Republicans – and constitutionally minded Republicans at that. 

So, that leaves me pondering why a Republican presidential wannabe would venture so recklessly in the deep and murky waters of constitutional eligibility – after making such a big deal about it and all.

What matters is winning the Latino vote, not the constitution.  Sound familiar?  The system was wrong for allowing Obama to be vetted and consequently seated in terms of constitutional eligibility.  Now stay with me here.  Yet, because American politicians have failed in the three years since Obama’s election to correct (or even attempted to correct) the failed system that allowed Obama to win the Presidential seat in the name of the Democrats – it is now only appropriate that the constitutional eligibility blind eye now be turned in REPUBLICAN favor.  A little quid quo pro if you will.  Since when was the constitution relevant anyway?  When will we, as Americans, become smart enough to realize that Left versus Right yields no true winner when both are wrong?

When both are wrong; all lose

And that is the underlying theme of all of this anyway isn’t it?  Both sides are wrong and they are wrong on all of the issues.  When it comes to the political elite; they are of the same agenda, just with different means to their ends.  Obamacare was so wrong, yet we nominate its architect for President? Never mind Nixonian Republicans and their attempt, ignore Clinton’s attempts and Gingrich who pushed it while Speaker of the House. Illegal immigration is wrong, but Reagan passed Amnesty; now Obama pens an EO for the exact same reasons Reagan pushed it through.  I mean really, with such hypocrisy; who should take the establishment Republican or modern Liberal seriously?  When is the last time an administration, albeit Republican or Democrat, effectively reduced government, regulation and spending?  Chirp, chirp.  (Hint: WWII for those not taking the question with its posed rhetorical intent.  BTW, it was the sharpest recession recovery in US economic history – yet today both Republicans and Democrats see it only fit to increase spending in order to provide entitlements in barter for votes).  The big difference is that Democrats have arguably done a better job of exposing Republican failures than Republicans have exposed the egregious failings of Democrats.  What’s funny is that Americans are ever so bitterly divided – all while their given elected officials pursue a common agenda against the good and freedoms of the people.  Well, that’s not really funny is it?  Please interject sad, pathetic, pitiful or any other adjective you deem most appropriate lieu of funny.

Conservative deviance

The problem is that, to an establishment Republican, I maintain an “extremely conservative” political perspective.  (The word they are looking for is DIVIANT, not so much extreme – while fully admitting extreme can fit in several places).  ;)

It is this deviance that separates Conservatives from establishment Republicans.  It is almost as if establishment Republicans have not yet awakened to the fact their political elite do not share their agendas, or at least I hope they don’t (given all the unconstitutional laws passed and what not).

It goes to reason why so many people refuse to follow politics.  It is truly a culture of deceit, corruption, hypocrisy and destruction.  In not following, you are spared the frustration and don’t have to look like a hypocrite for supporting one side over the other; you win by not playing.  What’s better than that? 

I hope at this point you realize our problem is not so much what the Left is doing versus what the Right is doing.  They are doing the same things and we only find political wrongs “un-American” and unconstitutional when it is the other side penning the legislation.  It is as shameful as it is true.  Perhaps what is most shameful is supporting this Two Party system solely designed for internal destruction and expecting someone to take you seriously.