Photo Credit: InfluenceTumblr
Perhaps you did not know this about me, but I am a troll! LOL! Seriously, apparently I am a troll… depending on who you ask of course. It was a recent wave of anti-PJ sentiment that unfolded on Twitter that brought this to the surface. Granted, I did not know about this until now because of my deliberate under utilization of social networking, but it is interesting nonetheless.
So how was it that I became a troll? Well, it was quite simple actually. Crystal
wrote an article in support of a Black Republican the GOP refused to support
. She tweeted the article and I uncharacteristically responded to her tweet in a very characteristic manner – and therein lies the problem… political honesty.
The Establishment Republican has done to Conservatism, what the Modern Liberal / Progressive has done to the Democrat Party – bastardized it. When you think of one, it is the lesser desirable aspect that comes forth in the mind’s eye. Clearly, not all Democrats are the baby killing, war mongering, wealth stealing, race baiting, profoundly ignorant, God hating, gay loving, right restricting, liberty stealing peddlers of political deceit, personal irresponsibility and overt dishonesty that Progressive influences have now made representative of the Left. In spite of such reality, the socially enforced current state of partisanism demands that we see only the worst in that which politically defies us. The mantra of resistance becomes a pseudo-intellectual and sophomoric statement of ideological defiance:
“You don’t agree with me because you are wrong, your political orientation is wrong and you will never agree because you are merely a blind follower of a highly faulted political regime.”
This temperament is of course deployed because forcefully attacking disagreement allows the freedom to not self-evaluate an individual’s own political orientation, personal beliefs and motives. Such self-evaluation would result in the acknowledgement that the aforementioned perspectives are questionable… in the least.
With this in mind, the true Conservative is likened to the more the stereotypical bible thumping, God fearing, overtly judgmental, prudish, gay hating, power grubbing, racist, fat White Establishment Republican in the eyes of the Progressively influenced Leftist.
In reality, these stereotypical, political impotents do in fact exist and it is their perverse distortions of self and ego driven narcissisms that are destroying the healthier sense of Americanism… by first destroying their own from within.
Not making sense?
Please indulge me while I elaborate and explain the whole “troll” thing.
“Daily Troll Alert?” Apparently, this “alert” is used to inform Twitter users when someone is saying something that other Twitter users belonging to a some political clique may not find favor in. It is sort of like high school gone digital – the quintessential definition of sophomoric. It is not being referred to as a troll that is worthy of garnering attention, it is who is so callow to perpetuate such nonsense. If you are thinking a Progressive, you could not be further from correct. Clearly an Establishment Republican (who has the political lack of awareness to consider herself a Conservative / Libertarian) attacking Conservative temperaments that are seeking to only improve the direction of the Right – albeit that Republicanism has reduced itself to the role of lesser evil considering Leftist alternatives).
The fact is Establishment Republicans are just as threatened by Conservatives as the Progressive Left. Both want more control over the people, less liberty and freedom for the people and attack on personal levels when they know they cannot defend themselves with facts of truth.
Let’s take the troll perpetuator, Gloria Mitchell for example. She is quick to launch personal attacks when the current state of the GOP is questioned in a manner no different than a Progressive attacking when Obama is criticized. Calling a person “stupid” is her favorite by far, but she is also quick to state that if you are Black, or of color and even remotely question the Republican establishment that you must be on “CRACK.” (Take the insinuations from that as you may… but the stereotypical Establishment Republican comes to mind. And to think, these same Republicans insist they are not a part of the problem that currently plagues the GOP. Equal parts amusing, sad and pathetic rolled up into a political ball of hate and contempt – mostly self-contempt that is).
Interestingly, our little Establishment Republican, Conservative hater is quick to denounce ObamaCare, yet is proud of her support for Mitt Romney who has also implemented health insurance mandates - and in the same breath, is quick to call others hypocrites, among other things.
Clearly a class act.
Here is my problem with today’s Establishment Republican; they make too many Progressives correct when they launch attacks depicting the Right as a bunch of racists based on generalizations and stereotypes.
Too often, we hear the elected Republican elite state how they represent American liberties and freedoms, yet, not a single one of them consistently voted against the Patriot Act
. These same individuals supported the freedom crippling NDAA
, unprecedented First Amendment limitations
have been applied both by Republicans and with Republican support. These Establishment Republicans are blindly supported no differently than Obama is supported by disillusioned Progressives – yet, we on the Right are not secure enough in our political identity to acknowledge the problem. If we are too insecure to acknowledge the problem exists, we will never have the courage to correct the course of the Right. Sadly, the failings of the Right are willfully and woefully protected by “troll perpetuators.”
America has fallen into a state of political despair driven by partisans who refuse to see their own wrongdoings and contemptuousness. Today’s partisans, with all their might, hate any all things that do not represent specifically what they are – even when the end goal of discourse is for their betterment and the benefit of the nation as a whole. It is this ill-contrived hate, which is now equally garnered on both the Right and Left that undermines the natural order of political progress. Rather than correct the wrongdoings, which are indefensible, it is chosen to attack. This only ensures what is wrong and can be improved, stays wrong and will not be improved. Little in the political realm is more disappointing.
Are we to believe that Liberals are the only women having abortions? Are Republicans the only ones in America who believe they have the constitutionally given right to bear arms? Conservatives must then be the only Americans that believe in less government. Such generalizations are completely absurd, but we have become so divided we cannot see how farfetched these assertions actually are. We have not only learned to tolerate these gross and inaccurate generalizations; we have grown so apathetic and submissive to political order, that we actually buy into it them.
Photo Credit: duckcommander.com
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.
When you are content to be simply yourself and don't compare or compete, everybody will respect you.
It may strike some as strange to state a partial government shutdown is a good problem to have. Such a statement would take most aback, especially when today’s American society has been lulled in a stupor on focusing on the here and now. This stupor has led to complacency, apathy and a lost sense of history. It is only when looking at the shutdown from much larger and far broader historical perspective, that an unprejudiced and bipartisan clarity be attained. Today, the Obama Administration has singly drawn our attention to the “Republican shutdown.” Their strategy is that of the President’s; “blame the Right
” and the people, now lacking the ability to self assess and self educate, will blindly follow – and they have.
While watching the news covering the partial shutdown this weekend, things fell into perspective. Eric Cantor emerged from the chambers and in his opening sentence declared the Democrats were at fault. Shortly thereafter, Nancy Pelosi emerged and immediately blamed the Republicans. More of the same nonsense. It was not until President Obama spoke that truth rang with the aforementioned clarity. He stated that the government was in a shutdown because of the House Republicans’ stubbornness. In the same sentence and in the same breath, the President stated that he would not sit with Republicans and the shutdown would remain in effect until the Republicans gave him the exact budget that he wanted with no attached stipulations. He insisted that he would not settle for anything less than his specific demands and again blamed the Republicans for the shutdown. Here is where Americans miss, have never fully understood, or have forgotten the obvious; America is a Constitutional Republic and is thus specifically designed to prevent such lineal and direct acquiescence of imperial polity.
While the public may in fact blame Republicans for the shutdown
, they fail to understand that it is House of Representatives’ constitutional responsibility to assure the powers of government remain dispersed and are not solely and exclusively under the authority of any singular individual named as President of the United States. What President Obama wants is to increase the debt ceiling by 1 trillion dollars with no stipulations while the House wishes to apply stipulations to the debt ceiling increase. Because the House did not bow down to President Obama’s attempt at imperial polity and upheld the values that founded American political influences, we now have a shutdown. When reflecting back on the President’s words concerning the Republican’s role in the shutdown, it is the demand of the Obama Administration that the House acquiesces to both the legislative and fiscal intent of the President. Again, America was created as a Constitutional Republic to permanently escape such tyranny.
We must remember why the Mighty Pine Tree once adorned the revolutionary Don’t Tread on Me flag. The British government enacted regulation stipulating no citizen could cut down tall and straight trees, even if the tree were on their private property. The government then cut down the tallest and straightest of trees for their naval fleet whether the tree was located on privately held or public land. Being that people purchased property largely for the quality of trees contained within the land, revolution was enacted to dispel imperial polity and attain freedom from government overreach and excessive taxation. More recently, President Obama spoke to this during our Independence holiday. The President stated that he felt the Revolution of our forefathers was wrong and government should possess the ability to tax as it sees fit and not in accordance with constitutional authority or the people’s desires. The historical context of the government shutdown is equally compelling.
The people have been fed very simplistic and sophomoric excuses for the shutdown. Responsible are Republicans, right-wing extremists and even the racist intentions of not wanting the nation’s first Black President to have his way. These are offered forth to shift the focus away from the 40-year history of government shutdowns. There have been 17 shutdowns prior to the current, 15 of these shutdowns were at the hands of Democrats, not Republicans. In fact, George W. Bush is the only president to not have served as President during a shutdown with a divided congressional body in the last 40 years. On the short term, Americans only see the more recent absence of a shutdown. Now that one has occurred, it is easy to sway Americans with disillusioned understandings of government and history to blame on the Party upholding the intent of a Constitutional Republic in order to thwart the reemergence of the governmental tyranny that drove the creation of America. To give the President the budget he wants in the manner in which he wants it with no stipulations, solely because it is his demand, defies the role of the House of Representatives where budgetary assent is required and ultimate fiscal responsibility is bestowed
under “trias politica,” or separation of power. As much as President Obama admires Britain’s parliamentary power that prevents their upper chamber’s dissent from the ruling or winning party’s manifesto – we are not in Britain, and for good reason we have contrived a Constitutional Republic to ensure specific disseminations of power, which block such attempts at absolute rule. Moreover, President Obama has tried to demand the House relinquish its constitutionally ascribed authority directly to the Office of the President of the United States. The House, acting under the rule of law refused to relinquish this authority to the President. The public do not see these basic, underlying separations for their historical significance and how they our vital to America today.
So yes, the shutdown is a good problem to have in that it prevents absolute power. President Obama’s followers and supporters find fault only in who the President has directed them to find fault in. The blame is placed upon the shoulders of the Republicans. The Right, in their eyes, is therefore responsible for what has been closed due to the shutdown. The failing here is the overlooked fact is the shutdown is partial - not complete. This means the Obama Administration decides what remains open, what is closed, what is funded and what funding is stopped.
It was not the Republicans who decided death benefits would not be paid to the families of fallen military members serving abroad, it was the Obama Administration. It was not the Republicans who decided to block people from stopping to view Mount Rushmore because “it is a National Monument and the government is closed” and therefore those driving by cannot pause to witness it, it was the Obama Administration. It was not the Republicans who have forced people from their own homes because they live in a National Park, it was the Obama Administration. It was not the Republicans who have blocked access to the Florida Bay
to prevent fishermen from accessing 1,100 square miles of open ocean due to the shutdown while maintaining staff to police the ban, again it was the Obama Administration. These choices are best described by a Biscayne Bay Park Service Ranger who stated, “We’ve been told to make life as difficult for people as we can. It’s disgusting.”
These actions are by selective choice, not by Republican force or any other entity besides that of the Obama Administration, which is largely “acting out” an Obama led temper tantrum at the people’s expense. The Left refuses to acknowledge their choices in what aspects of government have been shutdown, but are quick to blame the other while fully and willfully denying the Obama Administration’s motives against a Constitutional Republic as it demands ever increasing control and power over the nation in ways that are beyond the historic understanding of the average American.
Therefore, President Obama’s greatest power lies in the bias nature and intellectual weakness demonstrated by his support base. Today, they would support the House of Representatives losing its fiscal power so that he, as President can have unmitigated and unconstitutional fiscal control. However, should this exact control they want for Obama fall in the hands of Republicans – it is only then that they would see error in what is happening today and why separation of powers are important to the American way of life.
OK, the government shutdown. So what! If Congress were to shut down; at least then we could rest assured the federal government was finally acting with some semblance of competence. But of course, in true Obama fashion, the shutdown is the Republican’s fault – and he and his fellow Democrats are completely innocent and not in the least bit culpable. The shutdown, driven by Republican anti-ObamaCare sentiment has left federal employees temporarily out of work and has been made out to be the ultimate American partisan Armageddon. Ignorance abounds.
The “defund ObamaCare” line in the sand is not what it is being made out to be. The Republicans want “changes” to ObamaCare – not to cast it into the depths of the sea as Obama has been saying… yes, your beloved presidential messiah, is a liar. The bigger question people should be asking is what “changes” are being sought. Before that, the Right needs to grasp the concept that the Republican political elite SUPPORT health care mandates and “taxed” socialized medicine models. Hell, Gingrich, who many Republicans supported on his presidential run supported health care mandates
as Speaker of the House. Never mind the Republican Nixon era push
, or how “Conservative” organizations like The Heritage Foundation spearheaded Republican based support
. At least this supported existed when health care mandates were a Republican ideology. As Democrat ideology, the Republican Party has developed a public oriented façade that the Party despises the concept. If this were the case, why then would the Republicans have started the resistance with “repeal and REPLACE?” If the Republican Party cherished constitutional authority over political agendas of tax revenue, there would have been no need to replace ObamaCare for another insurance mandate model. Because Republican support is what is, socialized health care in its current ObamaCare form is never going away. Get over yourselves already. ObamaCare was largely based on RomneyCare and despite years of fussing about ObamaCare, the Right lined up in mass and voted for Romney. If the Right truly stood against ObamaCare and its founding unconstitutional conceptualisms, Romney’s name would have never found its way to a single ballot. It is continually that the Republican political elite say one thing while doing the opposite, yet the Right’s constituent response is only reflective to what their leading Republicans are saying – not to what they are actually doing. This leaves the Right arguing against their own Party’s agenda because they insist upon themselves with a perverse sense of denial about the larger Party’s actions.
Since we can reasonably establish underlying Republican support for ObamaCare, we can then focus on what the Republicans actually find wrong with ObamaCare and in the least would like its start-up delayed. Here is what you don’t know.
Perhaps the single largest problem with ObamaCare, beyond its blatant betrayal of constitutional authority, is the enrollment process. Forced upon the states and grossly underfunded by the federal government is the enrollment process itself which is managed by “Navigators” and “Assisters.” These individuals are hired to assist citizens in enrolling in ObamaCare in order to stay out of jail and or avoid being additionally taxed by the federal government for not enrolling. Due to ObamaCare’s excessive complexity, it was determined that Navigators and Assisters will need a minimum of 20 to 30 hours of training to effectively enroll potential candidates. Despite the training concern that was generated by the Obama Administration, they have allowed Navigators and Assisters to enroll citizens into ObamaCare with as little as five hours of training despite having no prior health insurance training or experience.
To complicate matters with enrollment, Navigators and Assisters will not be held accountable for providing misinformation about ObamaCare plans that cause the enrollee to undergo financial hardship as are other professionals such as accountants and financial planners that disenfranchise their clients through either malicious intent or professional incompetence. Long story short; the Obama Administration recognized the high probability of enrollment errors and rather than seek to correct the issues before these problems occurred, the Obama Administration has granted Navigators and Assisters “immunity” AFTER SETTING THEM UP TO FAIL the public. This will assuredly result in enrollment errors, cause enrollees to pay for services in which they have no need and have enrollees be refused access to care because they will not be enrolled in the correct plans. Sadly, those doing the enrolling will be provided federal protections for the harm they will undoubtedly cause.
This immunity however, stretches a bit further than one might imagine. Navigators and Assisters will have direct access to the enrollee’s Personal Identifying Information such as SSN, date of birth, household income and even this same information of other adult individuals living within the same residence. During the rulemaking session HSS conducted for ObamaCare, this concern led to a discussion to determine the feasibility of conducting background checks before hiring Navigators and Assisters to mitigate the high risk of identity theft. One government official serving as a board member who was said to be “well versed” in Human Resources questioned whether the federal government held the authority to conduct background investigations as a condition of employment. The discussion was then curbed citing background checks would hinder enrollment in that many areas where ObamaCare is in need. Potential Navigators or Assisters in these areas were described as being unwilling to submit to a background check and thus would not qualify for employment by default. This, according the HHS rulemaking board, would then leave gaps in where ObamaCare could be accessed and background checks were not included as a condition of employment. Again, the Obama Administration identified a risk with the enrollment process and ignored it because it was deemed more important to launch the program by a specified date than it was to protect the American consumer enrolled in the program. Sadly, this not where the enrollment issues end, it is where they begin.
The HSS was also advised against paying Navigators and Assisters on a per enrollment basis. They ignored the warning and have now set in place Navigators and Assisters who are grossly under trained, many of which have criminal backgrounds to include crimes of identity theft and have incentivized them to enroll the highest number people possible for the most expensive plan available while further granting them federal protections for misrepresentations of the program that cause financial harm to those seeking ObamaCare. This system of dysfunction immediately led to ObamaCare scams where individuals and organizations sought to exploit the easily compromised program. The HSS, once informed of the fraudulent activities refused to certify legitimately sponsored programs in order to protect the consumers. This simply means there is little to differentiate the real program from a fraudulent program until such a time as the IRS seeks action against an individual who is actually not enrolled in ObamaCare. In such a situation, it is the consumer who lacks protections and it is stretch to think the IRS will suddenly be forgiving when owed money when it has already abused its power
enforcing its own interpretation of the new health care law. Least we not forget, despite the misinformation and misrepresentations, ObamaCare IS NOT FREE. The majority of enrollees will have to pay for their mandated insurance plans. Because of this, the IRS now has unprecedented access to an individual’s financials that they will forcefully police. Failure to comply will bear results that are hardly unpredictable considering the IRS’ enforcement tactics
The problem here is that issues such as immunity for those enrolling individuals into ObamaCare, the gross lack of training, failure of the government vetting these employees for consumer safety reasons and the IRS’ power grab have not seen the light of day in the media and WILL bring direct harm to those who have been forced into ObamaCare. The ideology behind the program was that it was for the good of the people, yet those implementing the program have not done a single thing to protect the people from the problems that ObamaCare is guaranteed to cause. The “Republicans who have shut down government” as Obama likes to refer to them, want things like this fixed BEFORE implementation of the program. While there are a few who would completely defund and do away with ObamaCare in the name of constitutionalism, they are not the driving force behind the current budgetary debates.
To delay ObamaCare gives government the opportunity to correct the highly faulted program and protect the interests of the consumer who under ObamaCare are forced by law to figure out how to pay for their share of the law’s mandates. The majority of those who do not have health insurance do not have it because they cannot afford health insurance and pay for things like groceries and rent (see RomneyCare complications for an example of how this will affect most Americans enrolled in ObamaCare). The law forces that decision on their behalf at rates that have now been determined to be more expensive than pre-ObamaCare health insurance rates
. More specifically, Obama promised to decrease the average family’s health insurance by $2,500 per year, while it will actually surge some $7,450.
The truth, as painful as it may be, is not what the highly partisan banter has been about. What Obama supporters need to understand is that the program’s implementation is far more important to Obama than the protection of consumer interests that are clearly compromised by the program. The Right needs to accept the fact that the Republican political elite are now completely out of step with their constituent base. On both sides, Americans simply want to believe it is the other side that is wrong. Unfortunately, neither understands what is actually happening. Democrats have been duped, by their own over-abundance of ignorance, into believing Republicans are harming them by blocking ObamaCare while they (the Republican political elite) are in fact the only entity within the federal government attempting to protect them from the certain ill effects of ObamaCare. Republicans, in an attempt to protect the secrecy of their support of ObamaCare have used the denial of the Right to poise a defense of defunding the program. In doing so, they have lost the only position of integrity to be found within the entire debate. Republicans birthed the ideology of mandated health care models in America. They have wanted “ObamaCare” (or the like) for no less than 40 years and have pushed for it on several fronts since 1974. Supporters of the Republican Party must come to terms with this in order to understand what is really happening in America today and within their own Party.
Amazing is the deafening impact of denial when coupled with ignorance. Of course, the Left will never acknowledge that their great one is perhaps the single most deceptive president in US history and Right will never realize their political elite have long since abandoned them and their conservative values. In the end, we are left with exactly what we have here today. We now live in a land where rhetoric has replaced reality.
I have deliberately withheld commentary on the Trayvon Martin case in a silent hope others would wake up on their own. “Okay, the verdict was this; perhaps there is more to the story than I realize.” Self-education would then kick in and many would begin to calm down.
I should have known better and not set my standards high. So disappointing.
Truth is by nature self-evident. As soon as you remove the cobwebs of ignorance that surround it, it shines clear. – Mahatma Gandhi
The fact of the matter is that race has indeed played a role in the case that followed the death of Trayvon Martin. The problem that lies behind this fact is so few actually know the truth. Americans, along with the international community are outraged by Zimmerman’s acquittal. After all, he was guilty long before the “open and shut” case was even scheduled to commence. The collective over-reaction to the verdict has been laden with misinformation, ignorance, racist undertones, conjecture and denial; a reaction so immaturely visceral that Martin Luther King Jr. was inappropriately and ignorantly donned in a hoodie
and record unfriendings and blocks slowed Facebook servers. Unfortunately, where we are today with the Zimmerman verdict has little to nothing to do with how the verdict came to be. We are here because we, as a populous, refuse to self educate and only allow ourselves to be “informed
” by a bias and now fully divisive, progressive media machine. We believe that if the news and media provide information on a given topic, that information must be true and thus goes completely unchallenged. Take for example the racist “White
Hispanic” George Zimmerman. Originally, Zimmerman was described as White, which was updated to White Hispanic. We never asked ourselves the obvious because the racial undertones of a White
gunning down an unarmed Black youth appealed our basic insecurities with issues of race. What we failed to learn on this aspect of the case alone was that Zimmerman’s lawyer is suing NBC Universal Media
for defamation over the news outlet’s editing of the taped 911-call Zimmerman made upon encountering Martin in order to ensure he was viewed as a racist and to further advance the Obama Administration led anti-gun agendas. NBC released the following:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.
However, the unedited version reads as follows:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.
Thus, White Hispanic
was deemed necessary to assert the tone of racism the media was determined to achieve.
The full 911 transcript follows. Judge for yourself.
It is our predisposition to issues of race that NBC played upon knowing our inherent laziness would prevent us from searching for the full and a more complete story. After all, discovering the truth could mean that we had to acknowledge that we prejudged another, it meant that we could actually be wrong about something, or even worse – it could mean others could use our own words of prejudgment against us and view us as the actual racists! Imagine that.
The public has been deluded into finding Zimmerman guilty long before he went to trail. To many, it was an issue because someone identified as White shot an innocent and unarmed Black youth. Beyond that, little truth was sought; any other aspect of the incident would not comply with the predetermined prejudices that were already well at work. It is this racial phenomenon of predetermination that fueled sentiment against Zimmerman no differently than how the accused is socially guilty of sexual assault against a woman, or how we tend to vilify a teacher based on the accusation of misconduct against a student – before any facts are presented, (even then, it is the accusation that has a more impacting response than do the facts – just ask Herman Cain). Again, it is these prejudices of predetermination that skew our perceptions of reality.
Behind the case
To better understand the entire picture we must travel back both to and past the incident that took young Trayvon’s life. Following the shooting, Tracy Martin, Trayvon’s father, sought legal advice from his sister in law and attorney, Patricia Jones. Jones in turn referred the Martin family to Benjamin Crump and Daryl Parks of the Crump law firm. The duo needed an “offensive strategy” to build a case against Zimmerman. Here is where things not only go south, they get downright ironic!
Crump and Parks reached out to Orlando attorney, Natalie Jackson, who is a member of the Legal Redress Committee and Seminole County NAACP Board Member. To develop the offensive strategy, Jackson obtained the assistance of Ryan Julison. Jackson and Julison had previously worked together on the Sanford, Sherman Ware case. Julison ran the media campaign to support Ware. Ware, a homeless Black man, was struck from behind by Justin Collison, the son of then Sanford Police Lt. Chris Collison while trying to break up a fight outside of a local bar. Ware was knocked unconscious and taken to the hospital with a concussion and broken nose, Collison was not charged.
Citing racial injustice against Ware, Julison mobilized the community to bring attention to the Sanford Police Department’s cover-up. Zimmerman (who Julison and the media have effectively portrayed as a racist) assisted in bringing justice to Ware by supporting not only the cause itself, but also the NAACP assisting assets; namely Natalie Jackson. Zimmerman printed and distributed copies of flyers and participated in community groups in order to aid in bringing justice for the attacked Ware while demanding Sanford PD be held accountable for not charging Justin Collison because he was the son of a Lieutenant within the department. Hardly the efforts of a “racist.”
The younger Collison turned himself in six days later, but only after a video of the attack surfaced. The Sanford PD was investigated by the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office, which later determined the Sanford PD did not treat the Collison son “preferentially.” Ware opted to not press additional charges. Collison however, plead guilty misdemeanor charges, paid Ware’s medical expenses and made donations to three separate non-profit organizations for his involvement in the altercation. The Sanford Police Chief, Brian Tooley was forced to retire a mere three weeks early, though Zimmerman called for the cancellation of his pension.
Sadly, that is not where the irony ends.
When the Zimmerman family learned Julison, Jackson and the NAACP were involved in the case, they felt a sense of comfort because George Zimmerman had established a good rapport with them during the Ware case. However, they treated Zimmerman in an obfuscatory manner while fully knowing they were slanting public opinion against him in spite of his past assistance in a very racially charged incident and supporting a cause in the name of racial equality.
Clearly, there was a lot going on behind the scenes of the case the media refused to address because the race baiting tactics are so highly effective. When referring to the Ware case, it is important to note the Sheriff’s investigation found no preferential treatment, but the social predeterminations of prejudice award civil damages. It is not that the Sanford Police were not in the wrong; it was that that case being developed against Collison and the Sanford Police Dept. was aimed not at criminal prosecution, but a later civil outcome. Here, we have Zimmerman acquitted of both the murder and manslaughter charges. Already, there is talk of a civil case. See the pattern yet?
Clearly, as strongly inferred above, a conviction may not have been their means to an end. Think about it for a second. What lawyer would make such poor witnesses key to their prosecution? Tracy Martin, Trayvon’s father, who had repeatedly stated that it was Trayvon screaming for help during the altercation, later told police that it was not his son screaming for help on the recording. A witness by the name of Good was definitely not a good witness; at least not for the prosecution! It was Good who had the best view of the fight between Martin and Zimmerman. In his early statements, he described Zimmerman as the man on top during the fight. Upon cross-examination, he described Martin on top. His description in fact enhanced under cross-examination stating Martin was punching Zimmerman “MMA style.” Rachel Jeantel who was on the phone with Martin when he encountered Zimmerman changed her story and admitted she had no idea what happened between the two men. Forensics supported Zimmerman’s testimony, but the only time forensics supported the prosecutions positions were when the prosecution’s witnesses turned and gave testimony that supported the defense. With such weak witnesses, a prosecution will turn to the Rule of Law and (get this) the U.S. Constitution and not such facially subjective witnesses who would assuredly prove weak under cross-examination. Hence, it was never posed; “Under what authority did George Zimmerman have to restrict the constitutional freedoms of Trayvon Martin after the authorities directed him to stand down?” Not only was the case lost, this gross failure allowed some jurors the freedom to determine Zimmerman’s actions to confront and attempt to restrict Martin’s freedom was “going above and beyond!”
The fact of the matter is that Zimmerman had no authority under which to restrict the freedoms of the young Martin. Dare I say that had Zimmerman not been armed, he would have followed the direction of the authorities and not exited the vehicle. This was not directly challenged by the prosecution and the only basis they had to win the case was simply never heard. But then again, a jailed George Zimmerman would have difficulty paying off the Martin family and NAACP for shooting the unarmed and unconstitutionally confronted Martin. The civil case though, will hear the argument that was not adequately posed in the criminal case. Perhaps, “justice” in cases like this are defined by some in terms that are determined not by judicial but civil proceedings.
A strong argument can be presented that the intent of some is to deliberately undermine the judicial system by playing and preying upon the public’s predisposition to socially convict on grounds of racial bias. The media has deliberately misrepresented virtually all aspects of this incident knowing common public response would be to react and not self educate. Because of this, the verdict in favor of Zimmerman came a shock. What must be understood is what the media reported to the public about the incident has little (if any) resemblance to what actually came to light during the trail.
The trail did not see Trayvon as the child pictured in the press. The trail did not see Zimmerman as the gun wielding racist Ryan Julison and NBC made him out to be. The prosecution completely (perhaps even deliberately) sabotaged their own case against Zimmeran and the public was foolish enough to be duped into supporting the wrong things for the wrong reasons.
Your ground is worth standing
To bring this full circle, let us not forget the President himself who once thought it wise to use Trayvon Martin to push his gun control agenda. Shortly after the story broke, Obama described the young Trayvon with the most personal and intimate of references. Words he very poetically recanted following the verdict. The Obama Administration jumped onboard the anti-Zimmerman bandwagon in hopes the incident would find fault in Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law. Though Obama is still seeking to attack the law with his crony led DoJ, the law was not used to defend Zimmerman, or his actions that rainy day. There was a reason for this. The authors, sponsors and signatories of law publicly explained how the law was not designed to protect those who acted in the manner in which Zimmerman had. Sadly, the Obama minions socially attacked the law while blaming its existence at least partially, if not fully responsible for Martin’s untimely death. Is the law so demonic that it would have granted Trayvon the legal right to gun down Zimmerman for following him as Obama recently insinuated? Take 90 Seconds and read the pertinent section of Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law and judge for yourself:
The law is simply not written or designed in the manner it has been portrayed. In spite of such realities, the calls to repeal Stand Your Ground Laws and Castle Doctrine are spawned in the same lies, misrepresentations and distortions that have led to Zimmerman’s social conviction before the facts were presented.
There are few things in the world as dangerous as sleepwalkers. – Ralph Ellison
As a general rule, you don’t fully appreciate another until they are gone. They depart our world in an untimely manner leaving us hurt and even angry that they have left our side. How selfish we feel that such raw emotions infiltrate our own lives because we failed to fully celebrate the life of another while they were here with us. Often they asked to celebrate and too often, our individually unfolding lives proved more important. There were times when we worried deeply and viscerally for another and their safety. The good friends circled and discussed their concerns with both each other and often with anyone who would listen and possibly help. Fate happened anyway and in spite of our own mortal insecurities, Jamielee was taken from us
Truth be told; anger is more commonly misarticulated fear and guilt. In death, that anger becomes rationalized in selfish terms that are twisted with the use of more altruistic objectives. We are reminded each and every day of our lives of how unfair life is. And this is true; life is
unfair and no matter how hard we try to balance the small things to make the larger events more even and fair for another, we are left with the discomfort of knowing equal outcomes in life will never be fulfilled. We could have always done a bit more for Jamie, or even been a little more insightful. We believe that had we (or I
) done this, or perhaps not done that – that our today would be different. In the end, we wish Jamie were still among us and we bear a certain individual sense of responsibility for his loss – and for that, we get angry. It is the selfish and healthy mind at work devilishly inflicting our own lives with the insecurities of being wonderfully, yet so very fallibly human.
It is okay to be selfish
Ironically, it is okay to be selfish, especially when someone as lovable, likable and gregarious as Jamie has touched your life. Maybe it is time to explain why Jamie and Jamie’s life (present tense is deliberate) is so important me… from my own selfish point of view. Honesty is always healing.
Granted, I did not know Jamie as well as many of my closest friends, but Jamie showed me, through his death, that for the first time in my life I was safe and actually free to grieve loss. This may sound simple to most and I sincerely hope that it sounds simple to you because the safety to grieve the loss of a loved one is something we should all have the luxury of taking for granted.
It was not until we all sat and watched the slideshow of Jamie’s life that I realized the stress I had been feeling in those developing days was little more than me grieving his loss while sharing how his loss impacted those close to me. More accurately, it was when I hugged Theresa immediately following the slideshow
when it all fell into perspective. For the first time in my life, I was actively in mourning. For the first time in nearly as many years, tears filled my eyes. Though in pain, I was alive and even vulnerably human once again.
Stolen from decency
My life has been littered with loss from a very young age. Being from a large and extended family, death found our residence with a relentless persistence. I have lost my father, two brothers and countless friends before I could even consider myself an adult. It was a harsh childhood where abuse was more business as usual, than it was a horrible reality. There comes a point in an abused child’s life where they have to turn off the more commonplace emotions of love and sadness. You see, to extend yourself emotionally meant that you were vulnerable. I grew up in such a manner that being vulnerable only ensured that you were certain to be harmed. When it was the members of your own family harming you, there was no safety. So then, it was to be; I became emotionally disconnected to protect myself from the likes of my own mother who suffocated me with a plastic bag to “prove they [plastic bags] were dangerous in the hands of children.” They proved far more dangerous in my mother’s hands.
You read that right; suffocated by my mother. She baited me in while I had the bag in my hand smiling while saying, “Come over here. Let me show you something about that bag.” As she smiled and even laughed, she pulled the plastic bag over my head and twisted it shut around my neck. When the air stopped flowing, her smile turned to a look of pure evil as she refused to let go. I panicked and fought for my life against my mother hitting her in the face repeatedly until my eldest sister snatched me from her steely grip. Her unsympathetic parting words, “At least I know he will fight for his life.” Little did she know the beast of hate she birthed into existence in that vile moment. When your own mother is out to get you like that, you abandon the thought that any decency exists within anyone. You hate all people for all reasons and for no reason at all. You hate people who seem happy and you hate those who are not because they should be overjoyed with their lives when compared to that of your own. You hate, hate, hate all things for all reasons. It is your own decency that has been stolen from you, beaten out of you and ruthlessly discarded.
I would later watch my mother put a beating on my older brother that should have landed him in the hospital (had anyone been decent enough to take him) for something I did. I told her I did it, but beating my brother to a pulp seemed to be better suited for her aggression that day. Her sister (my Aunt) would later turn on my brother and me eventually beating me unconscious after locking my brother in the basement. And those are but the beginning of the stories that defined my sense of normality.
The first thing smoking out of that hellhole was the Navy. I joined, but only as a tool to use such training to inflict my will on others in similar fashion to how others had been inflicting their will on me for all of those years. I was a dark, bitter person who was full of rage. Having committed my life to harming others, I found that others were always seeking to harm me. Even in adulthood, the safety to mourn still eluded me.
Life is about the good
And then came Jamie.
And then we lost Jamie.
Unlike my father, brothers, friends, Shipmates and Marines; I was able to mourn for not only Jamie, but with his family and friends. For the first time in my life, I was able to feel something I had committed a lifetime to repressing – genuine hurt.
This allowed me the freedom to realize how much loss my life has suffered and mourn for my father and brothers. In a sense, Jamie helped me return to decency. He showed me that while individual members acted badly against me, not all people were to be hated for it. You see, my anger at life was simply my fear of life because I had spent a lifetime dealing with the worst life has to offer. Jamie showed that Rachel was right: I am proof that people can change and that I have changed and am no longer that dark person so full of rage and hate. Without Jamie, I would not understand this for what it is today. My focus today would not be on the good, it would be on the bad. That is something Jamie taught each time he smiled! Life is about the good in it, not the bad we take from it.
Jamie taught me that even though those who sought to harm the innocent had once fouled my life with hate, I am now living a life submerged in love and fully supported by an amazing woman, incredible family and the best friends ever known to me. For that and those who now surround me, I am forever thankful.
The mourning process is new to me. I guess I am just damaged that way, please feel free to judge me for having been forced into such emotional naivety. But, emotional novice or not, I can tell you this! The best way to honor those whom we love and have lost is to move forward with the tools that they have enlightened us with in their passing.
I think the onus falls on the individual when determining how to best proceed with Jamie in their hearts as opposed to an active name in a cell phone, or a picture branding a social networking page. Jamie would want each of us to acknowledge that even though his loss has knocked us down, he can actually help return us to our feet in a manner that has us standing tall with our heads held high. We just have to believe and embrace a life beyond our own insecurities. No matter the cause, or the timing for that matter, Jamie’s death is the fault of no single individual or even a collective group. Relinquishing the guilt is the first thing Jamie would want. He was full of life and always wanted everyone around him to live life as hard as he did. He would not want the guilt of his death to overshadow the power your life. However, he would be pleased (and shocked) to know that he unwittingly passed to you a set of tools that improved aspects of your life even after his came to such an abrupt end. Believe and embrace for Jamielee.
Why I share
I share this because I can. Much of my life has been lost to my past. Jamie, while the circumstances incomprehensively tragic, was the catalyst that brought this awakening out of me. People like Tino stood up, completely vulnerable themselves, and showed me that I could survive such emotional exposure and no longer be harmed for simply being human and fallible. Unconditionally, Ric listened, supported and helped me back to my feet when I realized the source of my inner darkness - for which I harshly blamed myself. With little more than a word or two, his support validated the like perspectives of Rachel, Tino, Melissa, Morgan and Daniel whom all have accepted a life of support over judgment. The fallibility of being human is a blessing in that it shows us a better way. Experience and express. Be flawed. No one will love you any less, or think differently of you because of your past…
I share this because I have to. It is a duty of sorts. You crawl through the muddy obstacle course and the first thing you do is give pointers once you have completed it. You then go back and point and laugh while others effort your accomplishment. It is the way life works. Jaime is pointing and laughing, but has long since given us the pointers. I therefore own a small piece of responsibility on Jamie’s behalf and must share the lessons he has taught me. This is simply my medium. Choose yours. You can pass deuces and truth simultaneously you know – you just have to do it in your own way and in your own time – this is mine. Do it for both Jamie and yourself.
I share this because I want to. To date, only a handful of people have heard these stories of my past. It is not that they are a “secret” per se; it is that my personal discomfort with my past was overwhelming. The single greatest dishonor I could serve Jamie would have been to keep stalling my future for my past! So, I am letting it go because Jamie taught me that keeping it was killing me slowly (and I mean that in its literal sense). The day will come when I too will pass from this retched place leaving all of you wonderful people behind. I then will point and I will laugh. It is you that will have to get up, knock the mud of life off and keep it moving! The expectation is that you will. Maybe not at first, and that’s cool. You just have to do it in your time. But, here is what this is about it. You can’t remember me without remembering Jamie because he is the one that gave me the new lease on life by giving me the tools to understand that my past is simply my past… For that, I am eternally grateful for the short amount of time I had to spend with great man who helped shift my future.
Remember, embrace and live!
If you are of the masses who believe Obama is the first Black president, you could not be more wrong.
Thomas Jefferson, America’s third president was the nation’s first Black president. Jefferson, the "son of a half-breed Indian squaw and a Virginia mulatto father," went to great lengths to conceal his ethnicity. Jefferson was said to have destroyed all documentation of his mother and even seized letters from others that were penned by his mother.
The nation’s seventh president, Andrew Jackson, was the son of an Irish woman who had married Black man. Jackson’s eldest brother was sold as a slave. Later, in 1863, Jackson was placed on a 2-cent stamp; it was satirically named “The Black Jack.”
Abraham Lincoln was called "Abraham Africanus the First" by his opponents because his mother was known to be the product of an Ethiopian tribe. Lincoln’s dark skin and course hair also confirmed to many that he was the product of an African father.
President Warren Harding, unlike Jefferson, Jackson and Lincoln, never denied, or tried to hide his African heritage. Harding not only attended Iberia College, a college for fugitive slaves, both of his parents were on African lineage.
Calvin Coolidge took great pride in his ethnicity as he boasted his mother was of dark complexion because she was of Native American descent. Coolidge’s mother was actually a “Moor
” and not Native American. It was later determined that Coolidge was in fact of African descent.
There you have it. Quick, clean and simple; Obama is not the first Black president.
Vaughn, L. D. (2002). Black People and Their Place in World Hisrtory. LULU Press.
It is amazing how an entire nation can get something so simple, so wrong.
Sadly, citizens naturalized to America have a better understanding of the responsibilities of being American citizens than do those Americans to whom citizenship is ascribed through birthright. Of the nine responsibilities of American citizenship, the fifth reads as follows:
"Respect the rights, beliefs, and opinions of others."
As the nation descended upon Chick-Fil-A in a show of support for the 1st Amendment, the media portrayed the chain’s record sales as a national rebuke of gay rights, gay marriage and gay people in general – which it was not. Americans supported Chick-Fil-A because Americans support the notion of freedom of speech. This was construed as; to support the 1st Amendment is to stand against the gay agenda which has been allowed to demand special consideration and priority of acceptance; not equality.
Much of our social life is befouled by this perverse sense of political correctness. If you, as a member of a given majority, disagree with the position of a selected minority group – you are evil, racist, discriminatory and branded as such for simply maintaining and articulating your own values. They gay community’s treatment of Chick-Fil-A is of no exception. In fact, it best demonstrated the uglier side of the gay community as it insisted NOT IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY as American citizens to respect the rights, beliefs and opinions of other individuals.
The problem we face in America is we now lack the courage to place this individual responsibility where it belongs – on the individual. “God,” as a word would not be banned in public schools and buildings across the nation where it is deemed to “offend” the lesser sensibilities of social influence. There is nothing wrong with one person knowing another believes in a god that they do not. In fact, it is their AMERICAN RESPONSIBILITY as CITIZENS to respect this difference – not force a difference into suppression as the gay community and its political enablers have attempted to do with Chick-Fil-A.
Americans across the land have gotten to see the uglier side of the gay community in recent days. Their demands for “special treatment” for being gay met stout resistance in the form of Americans whom cherish the 1st Amendment over the demands of the now clearly misguided gay agenda. If one person is against their agenda, the gay community then seeks to force all Americans to side with the gay agenda or suffer consequences for simply possessing different values.
Lawmakers have mistakenly weighed in seeking to restrict both commerce and free speech – unconstitutionally of course. This culminated in a HUGELY record breaking day for Chick-Fil-A sales. The gay community has been very neatly put into its place, but still refuses to accept opinions, beliefs and perspectives that differ from their own.
It is one thing to respect a person’s right to be gay. However, it is un-American to force that acceptance on another in the manner that Mayor Edwin Lee and the horrid Rosanne Barr have. It is not that gays are bad, or the gay agenda is wrong – it is that the face of gay America has lost its truer American influences.
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.
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.
One thing is for sure, you learn more about American political culture than you want to.
Over time, you find yourself struggling to maintain a balance between your own political alliances and what is right from a more objective perspective.
Your awareness of America’s plight under current political influences forces you to accept a reality the average American voter is free to deny the existence of.
All of a sudden, you’re alone in your understanding of a two party political machine hell bent on the destruction of America’s intent.
Over time, I have grown weary of the lies perpetrated by both the Right and Left as they seek to advance their collective agendas against the people. Lies both voters of the Right and Left accept as reality. Having grown up Liberal
and now freely embracing Conservatism to actually vote with my personal values, all of this has brought me to my current place in time.
The time has come to stop allowing Republicans from so easily destroying Conservative interests. "More or less, Conservatism, mothered by the Republican Party and Fathered by the Democrat Party, currently suffers an Oedipus complex in that Conservatives wish to destroy Democrats while they harbor a perverse attraction to the Republican political elite." - Paul Johnson Proof and reason
Have you ever stopped to take a look at the Left versus Right and realized the arguments only exist because the Constitution has become an afterthought that is only used when a given side finds it convenient?
If we place the Constitution first, we would not have the volatile political atmosphere of today.
To me, this means BOTH Republicans and Democrats have duped the American voter into debating the semantics of an argument in order to force their prying eyes away from the only Document that has the power to FORCE government back into its LIMITED role over the people.
The Democrat versus Republican perspective actually LIMITS the perspectives of debate.
Us against them is what the voter thinks, but the American voter lacks the awareness to see the Democrat and Republican political elite are now essentially one in the same. Proof positive lies here
It is here that I feel myself losing my grip on Conservatism as a political affiliation.
First of all, in more places than not, in order to vote “Conservative,” you must register Republican to do so – even though there are ever increasing disparities between the two.
My thinking at this point in time is that Conservatives are selling out their own personal and voting values to play second fiddle to a failing and highly distorted sense of Republicanism that rules the Right today.
Here’s how they do it
Rush Limbaugh was probably worse about it in 2010 than was anyone else.
If the Tea Party votes for such and such, he would rant, we will split the vote and the Democrats will win. (And they will in turn advance the very same agenda against the people the Republicans sought to).
This has evolved into a new Republican mantra; “You have to look at the bigger picture.” the newly recruited, newly brain washed, once Conservative, newly pseudo-Republican schlepps now say.
They are saying; put your Conservative values aside so Mitt can slay Barak in the name of the honorable Republican Party!
And, in droves they are doing just that – placing their voting values aside so a Republican with NO CONSERVATIVE VALUES OR INTERESTS can AGAIN hold the Office of the President of the United States. A proposal of lunacy
It would be bad if Obama were reelected, we all know that.
But what we don’t know is what it will take for Americans to understand the need of more Conservatives influences in America.
Perhaps eight years of assaults on the Constitution by this man will be enough to make Americans appreciate the Constitution and its intent to LIMIT GOVERNMENT.
Perhaps it will take even more threats against personal freedom for the people to call upon the Constitutional Articles and a certain Declaration to return America to the people she ascribed a responsibility of protection.
Perhaps what the American voter needs is a true wake-up call to understand the threat their growing government actually represents to them.
Obama may well be the man to bring it to them given enough time.From Conservative to Mindless Minion
It is tiresome watching once Conservative voters falling in line like mindless minions (#mindlessminions
) to a higher Republican order touting the likes of a presidential candidate that is a direct expression of their very protests against the Republican Party.
And to think they have the nerve say, “You have to look at the bigger picture.”
A bigger picture of no Obama and no Conservative values, but all they will admit to is the former, their conscious’ refuse to allow them to address the latter.
Sell outs have a hard time acknowledging certain things you know; no matter how obvious they are.
But I digress.
The fact of the matter is that many Conservatives lack to courage to truly be Conservative.
First they flocked to Herman Cain who demonstrated more Republican values than he had interests in individual freedom.
Now they pull the Romney line so the Republicans can defeat Obama with a man who will be as much like Obama as Obama has been like Bush.
Just like Obama allowed Bush’s final budget to wreak havoc for four years, Romney will bury the fight against Obamacare.
He is after all, the practiced architect and prototype developer of Obamacare – the program the Right spent millions trying to stop.
More hypocritical than ironic when you stop and look at the history of the Republican fight FOR health insurance mandates
He will, in the name of Republicans, continue to recklessly spend and Blame Obama for not passing a single budget since Bush.
Foolishly, Conservatives are yet again supporting the bane of their existence the likes of both the Republican Party and Romney as their selection for Free World Leader.
These so-called Conservatives say they like Romney’s business acumen.
I do too, but what does that have to do with being President?
Better yet, what will that matter when Americans lack the personal freedom to fully enjoy a better economy WHICH CANNOT BE DELIVERED TO THE PEOPLE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT in the first place?
But hey, I don’t “see the bigger picture.”
With the loss of the Conservative voice influencing American politics, Republicanism is allowed to freely expand government without the resistance of Conservatives whom have vested against their own values because they have been fooled into supporting the Republican norm over their own values EVERY ELECTION CYCLE.
When will Conservatives stop playing second fiddle to the lesser Republican?
When will Conservatives have the courage to stand up for their own values and have the faith in the values that guide their everyday lives and vote accordingly?
While it is absurd to actually wish another four years of Obama on Americans to awaken them from their own world of lies, denial and apathy; the only element that can stop America’s downward spiral are the Conservative influences being currently being brain washed by the Right into supporting the least Conservative candidate in the field; next to Obama that is.
Why is it that so few see this for what it is?
Don’t forget to follow me on Twitter @PJ43033
, add me on my personal Facebook
, or like my Facebook Fan Page
Political writing for a living is an unusual form of work.