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.
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.
There are just some basic principles in life that are simply undeniable. Life is not fair. Some are born with a silver spoon while others are forced to get a tetanus shot upon birth to cope with all of the rust, erosion and decay they are born into. The silver spoons fail in life and the oxidized find success. Just as life is unfair, life has no guarantees; the fate of success in life lies solely in the hand of the believer
. Will of freedom
There comes a time in life when our will must overcome our desire. It is good to desire more from life, but without the will power to bring such desires to fruition, they are mere daydreams, wants and covets that sour the taste of life itself. This is an undeniable reality that takes courage to accept. This reality has a very peculiar relationship with freedom.
Freedom is the right to fail. It is the ability to try, persist and persevere until the individual opts to yield. There is nothing in existence that formally forces the pursuit of happiness or success. Only the choices and will of the individual provides shelter from the risk of pursuing more. It is what makes America great, it is what America was built to embrace, it is what we are failing to uphold. Demons and dreams
Lost in the translation of freedom is that the individual is charged with the responsibility of their own journey. Because some fail, all must be propped up. Because some find success, the law of the land insists that none shall be entitled to success. It is maddening. We grow up wanting more; with the desire to attain and the understanding that the ability to achieve lies within the will of the individual brave enough to dream it to be true. As some fall short, they are viewed as the direct casualties of those who have succeeded despite that fact that all have started out with the same ambitions. It has become a transition; from dreams to demons. We want, yet we seek to punish through political demonizing for finding the success they have spent a lifetime striving for. Life is unfair and some find success while others do not, but all are free strive for it, all want it, none want a life without it.
It is unfortunate what we are doing to success. We make a fuss over the millions the outgoing Google CEO will receive, while never comparing it to the 2.6% of the value he brought to Google. Never considering how hard he worked to achieve in life. Never contemplating what he lives without because he opted to put work first. We only see CEO and dollar signs as we are being politically manipulated into believing success is only bad when someone other than us attains it; that not all have found it. Equal outcomes of the mediocre
It is not a matter of equal outcomes, it is as impossible to provide equal outcomes as it is impossible for all to be the coveted CEO. This however, does not make success wrong. Our current obsession with the other and the success they find only hinders our own individual journeys through life. If the other is bad for finding it, we should not pursue it, we should instead bide our time to allow government to provide to us our fair share. It is easier and it comes without the risk, without the hard work, without the sacrifice and without the social dysfunction that often accompanies true success. Our dreams lessen to the mediocre which we have ill fatedly learned to celebrate. Our desires fail to find the challenge of will power. We become less as we learn to settle for what others feel is best for us out of their own perverse envious, obsession of the other.
Perhaps it is best to open with a bit of history (which is now relegated to the archives of American trivia) to shed some light on an ever fleeting aspect of Americanism.
On June 8th, 1789, James Madison introduced to the House of Representatives a draft of the First Amendment: ''The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.'' The special committee to some extent rewrote the proposed Amendment: ''The freedom of speech and of the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assemble and consult for their common good, and to apply to the Government for redress of grievances, shall not be infringed.” In this form it went to the Senate and in due process it was once again rewritten: ''That Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and consult for their common good, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.''
When we think about the First Amendment, we must first think of why it exists, especially when it comes to the freedom of speech. If certain forms of speech were not offensive to some, speech would not need protections under the Constitution. Speech and the freedom thereof, are a right to protect the expression of that which some may deem controversial or offensive.
In doing so, the burden of responsibility has been placed on the receiver of a given message, not the sender! Today, this point is being grossly overlooked by those most protected by the Amendment; the media. Case in point; CNN Radio’s Lisa Desjardins who is currently working on a three part series
addressing the “anger” and “hateful” nature of politics. This of course brought into the limelight after Saturday’s slaying of the innocent in Tucson, AZ.
Desjardins started her series by singling out friend and fellow Examiner writer Jesse Mathewson
. To make her point, Desjardins took exception to Jesse’s active and very open position against immigration enforcement measures in the state of Arizona while questioning his direct approach in his articles attacking strategies below the formal levels of the law to tighten immigration in a region economically stricken by illegal immigration. This of course was exploited as she passively assaulted Jesse’s right to speak freely in her defense of those who may be offended by such speech.
Largely this has been the tone of America. Are we saying things too tersely that leads to an atmosphere in which violence may be a secondary by-product? What is missing is the intent of the First Amendment from its initial form, to the final Amendment right of all Americans. The tragedy in Tucson, though horrid, has lent itself to a debate aiming to protect the receiver of messages and away from what the right actually protects. This is a passive aggressive attack on the U.S. Constitution, its Amendments and the rights granted to the people under it. The problem is that Americans see interviews such as this as being benign and not for the malignancy of anti-Americanism they actually represent.
The issue that lies before the American people is not in what is being stated, it is the lack of the enforcement of the responsibility of respecting freedom even when we do not fully agree with the controversies it brings forth. When speech is expressed in a manner that is not desirable to some, and they in turn go forth and act violently against it; it is they whom have failed freedom – it is not the sender, but the receiver who is wrong. Like it or not, this how America was formed to be.
As the nation moves forward in trying to understand the acts of Saturday, January 8th, 2011, we struggle to make sense of that which will simply never make sense. It is out of desperation that our struggle inappropriately extends itself to defend the lowest common sensibility and in doing so we move further and further away from freedom.
Immigration is an area in which Jesse and I have never seen eye to eye and probably never will. This however, does not define our relationship; it accentuates our relationship. This is due to the simple fact that we not only respect each other, but we respect each other’s rights as Americans. Respect for the rights of fellow Americans is what the mainstream media is thwarting through its irresponsible reporting and representations of “angry” and “hurtful.” Spirited debate is demonized because it suggests that an opposing view has been offended into defending itself. America is moving away from the burden of freedom out of a gross lack of respect for and ignorance of freedom itself.