Right As Usual

Eh, it depends on who is talking about it, and who is 'violating' it. Lots of questions - does anyone reading this have any answers? Some would say that the fulmination over statues, flags, religion and other unifying traditions is NOT an organic outrage, but a deliberate, politicized, and targeted series of actions aimed at destroying America's sense of itself as a nation. We are deliberately being driven to a Balkanized collection of suspicious, antagonistic, and tribal entities, in order to pave the way for takeover. BTW, I strongly object to the use of a fake-reverent position, designed to deflect criticism of their actions, which are meant to convey a political viewpoint that many, if not most, of the viewing audience does not agree with. I think that, should the Browns players continue this action, Browns fans should work together to pick a Browns Boycott Day (BBD) , preferably chosen to be a day that would normally be a VERY high attendance day. How about choo...

Refuse to let any 'antifa protestor' participate unless they take off the masks. Masked people don't belong at potentially violent public meetings - on either side. Funnily enough, it's the KKK that has taken off the mask. Few of them appear in public with their cloaking hoods. And, they've taken the heat for that - losing jobs, alienating family, letting themselves in for years/decades of retaliation for their public expression of opinion. Not so the 'Antifa'. They wear hoods masking their identity. The police let them into public venues, where they have an obligation to vet those participants. I"m going to make a suggestion. Pink Spray paint - or Lime Green. Or any other color. Pick ONE color, and use it to mark the clothing of the masked 'Antifa' thugs. When one of them harasses/hits/uses a weapon against an 'enemy', bring out the spray. Mark them, and make it harder for them to escape the rightful arrests, lawsuits, and o...

It's not the first time it's been tried. It won't be the last. However, it's staggering just how many people want to limit First Amendment Rights to those speeches and writings that agree with theirs. It's a Euro idea, that SOME opinions or writings are just unacceptable, and MUST be censored. It didn't start with the Nazi party, as is often suggested. Long before Hitler, European countries were censoring Socialists, Communists, Anarchists, Atheists, Feminists, those who opposed the official state church, those who were pro-Democracy, etc. But, the Leftists and their allies, the Progressives, have gathered energy, used their positions to pressure companies to cancel their provided services to organizations - or individuals - that they deem too controversial. Or Non-Lefitst. Or "Homophobic" or "Anti-Woman/LGBTQ-whatever/Black/Minority". Without proof. Except their VERY strong Say-So. The same people who insisted that churches had t...

...to question just WHY was the leader of this Alt-Right protest a former member of Leftist organizations, and a supporter of Obama? I'm sensing a well-executed ploy to advance the Progressive/Leftist agenda, by co-opting their opponent's most extreme would-be ally. I don't like the Progressive Left (as distinguished from individuals identifying as Progress/Liberal). They are hiding their true agenda, under the guise of being 'anti-fascist'. That agenda, in their own words, includes: Deliberate targeting of journalists who want to fairly report on their activities Hiding their l ong-range goals in the hopes of getting some recruits from those targeting the Confederate monuments Using the Progressive Left to promote their Marxist-Leninist goals  - yes, the WWP WAS at the protest If you think "Good!" and declare that as long as they support your cause, you're OK with that, I have but one caution, "Who rides a tiger dare not dismount...

It seems like a harmless idea - even NOBLE. People, driven by their individual sense of outrage against historical offenses, gather together, and tear down monuments/statues to former Confederate leaders. I mean, the Confederacy LOST! So, why protect the heritage of a rebellious group? It's not about them. It's not about keeping the statues up. It's not even about whether or not the monuments should be removed. It's about a minority using their personal feelings - and, acting on them in a criminal way - to bypass public discussion (NOT screaming), legislation, and referendums, to remove the monuments. We are a divided people. We are NOT joined by blood ties, a shared culture, or common religious traditions. But, we share the same framework - the Constitution - and the laws that have built on that. If we substitute direct action by factions, we tear down that framework - and its protections. This is a dangerous road to travel. It's one that can - and I fe...

The 2nd time, in the same part of the world.  The official story is that someone, or several someones, screwed up. This story seems to question that supposition. The 1st time, a container ship hit the Fitzgerald.  It was a Phillipine ship, who path (shown in the link), is highly suggestive of it NOT having been an accident. Now, that might have meant just carelessness, not deliberate. However. Remember what Goldfinger said. “Mr Bond, they have a saying in Chicago: 'Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action'.” Share

Here's some information about the Antifa (Anti-Fascist) members you might find interesting. I'm NOT saying that the Alt-Right is OK, or without blame. Neither side covered themselves with glory in Charlottesville. The trouble is, BOTH sides think they were the put-upon one. From what I could see (both in the TV news, and online videos), almost everyone in that situation made some bad choices. The Alt-Right - for deliberately provoking with their use, or accommodation of Nazi symbols, Supremacist chants, and confrontational attitudes. Perhaps, as they claim, all of the marchers weren't in those groups. But, by allying themselves with those who were, they undermined their position, and supported those fringe-element aims. The Antifa - for their use of violence in previous actions - throwing things, vandalizing, assaulting people. Their history made a tense situation even worse, as their opposition had some justification for feeling threatened. I especially disliked t...

The fallout from his memo is huge. The usual suspects are fulminating wildly. But, many are defending his actions, and pointing to the logic underlying his argument. Including this woman: Deborah W. Soh , a Toronto based science writer who has a PhD in sexual neuroscience from the University of York — "As a woman who’s worked in academia and within STEM, I didn’t find the memo offensive or sexist in the least. I found it to be a well thought out document,  asking for greater tolerance for differences in opinion, and treating people as individuals instead of based on group membership. Within the field of neuroscience,  sex differences between women and men—when it comes to brain structure and function and associated differences in personality and occupational preferences—are understood to be true, because the evidence for them (thousands of studies) is strong.  This is not information that’s considered controversial or up for debate;  if you tried to argue o...

Title is a quote from Yeats "Second Coming". Surprisingly, I've been reading poetry lately - NOT like me, at all. Many, on both the Extreme Left and on the Non-Conservative Right (what we Conservatives like to call RINOS), are expressing dismay at the polarization of the American public . It's not as though this is an unusual thing - we've been sharply divided before: American Independence - few Americans realize just how popular our connection with England was - fully 1/3 of the population supported it. Another 1/3 were Revolutionaries. The rest sat on the fence, waiting to see which side would prevail. Federalists vs. the Original Confederacy - it was a long and contentious fight to Constitutionalize. Civil War, including the Reconstruction Period. Populism - the original Uprising of the Deplorables. Anarchy - deliberate use of assassination and bombings to promote Leftist aims. The anarchists of that time were allied with the Wobblies and other ra...

This will be short - go to this site for a discussion of immigration that brings up some points not often addressed. Share

There are those who believe that the only problem with immigration is that SOME people just hate Brown people. There are others that believe that the issue is keeping relatively unskilled, poorly-educated, and generally non-English speaking from flooding into the states, making it difficult for American citizens to get a starter job. For the neighborhood in which it occurs, tolerating the invasion is both disruptive and dangerous. There are those who argue that more immigration is needed to fill jobs. There are those who argue that there really should not be any distinction drawn between legal immigrants, and those that ignore borders and visas. So, to be able to address ALL the concerns of the various factions, Comprehensive Immigration bills are always the solution of choice. That's a bad decision. It would be far better to specifically address issues and problems, one at a time. Kevin Williamson is on board with the Comprehensive Immigration crowd (CIC, for shor...

I was reading through the docs, and noticed that Lynch's husband was present. So - does attorney-client privilege apply in that case? Because my (non-lawyer) understanding is that if a 3rd party is present, confidentiality goes out the window.  I did see President Clinton at the Phoenix. airport as I was leaving, and he spoke to myself and my lmsband on the plane_ Share

Obama's administration was involved in more that the Obamacare financial fiddles. That's a major drawback of blindly supporting a President - his errors, deals, under-the-table actions, and cronyism will eventually leak out. Obama had a LONG run of good press. The non-MSM outlets were derided as "fake", "racist", H8rs, and conspiracy theorists. Which, to be fair, some of them were. But, not all. And people's reliance on the worst sources can be explained by the disconnect people felt from the MSM - whom they KNEW to be bigoted liars, and disdainful elitists, as well. I remember when Obama was first elected, in 2008. I was at my post, watching the kids stream in for their first class. Their faces were shining - they were ECSTATIC that Obama had won. Their optimism was obvious, and they re-doubled their efforts in school. Well, for a small few, that would have be 2 times zero. But, even for the worst students, they saw a vision of what life COU...

There is a fine line between the Spiritual dimension and the all-inclusive Leftist/Political/Social dimension. Spiritual USED to refer to a relatively coherent and rational schema of philosophical thought. That was out when the Transcendentalists  - a philosophy much-loved by the Hippies of the 1960s - began their insinuation into organized religions. From Wikipedia: A core belief of transcendentalism is in the inherent goodness of people and nature. Adherents believe that society and its institutions have corrupted the purity of the individual, and they have faith that people are at their best when truly " self-reliant " and independent. Transcendentalism emphasizes subjective intuition over objective empiricism. Adherents believe that individuals are capable of generating completely original insights with as little attention and deference to past masters as possible.   Originally brought into America by the Unitarians, this philosophy has infiltrated many seminaries ...

Fans of the old show The Brady Bunch will get that reference. I found a good list of questions to ask about the "Russian Influence on the 2016 Election" story - emphasis on the word STORY. To me, # 5 is the most critical: 5. Precisely what meddling occurred?  Somebody meeting with a Russian does not constitute proof of anything. rather, this is the classic witch-hunt accusation of the McCarthyite "Red Scare" of the 1950s-- guilt by association: you were seen conversing with a Communist, thus you must also be a Communist --or at a minimum, you are tainted by association and thus  under a cloud of suspicion that can never be cleared because no accusation of guilt in a court of law is ever made. Guilt by association is insidious because it can't be cleared in court.  Those accused of guilt by association are not innocent until proven guilty-- they are guilty until proven innocent, a proof that can never satisfy the accusers. A precisely defined chain of...

This academic paper on cousin marriage is fascinating. One major feature of Islamic culture, even in non-Arabic countries, is the high degree of cousin marriages. The natural outgrowth of that familial interdependency is autocratic government, laws without teeth, and government by favor, rather than right. That's not compatible with the American value of government by rules and laws. That framework does, it is true, sometimes leave individuals with little recourse against harmful government actions - or lack of action. However, the alternative, in which pressure groups are the only way to direct an outcome also disadvantages some. There is no perfect government. There are no perfect people. All are flawed. However, government by rule and law has a MAJOR advantage - it is codified and predictable, thus giving a roadmap for action. Share