Democrats sweep 2020 elections – M&M’s seen as cause of upset

Dateline, Washington DC,  November 4, 2020: 

You didn’t read that wrong.  If nothing changes, the Democrats will definitely sweep the 2020 elections.  Yes, the Republicans are defending 22 seats in the Senate against just 12 on the Democrat side.  Yes, prognosticators right now are saying that little, if anything, will change in the makeup of the Senate.  Yes, the House changed majority in 2018 and that’s already in the Dems column.  And Yes, Donald Trump is the encumbent which carries powerful weight in the voting booth.  So why the gloomy headline (gloomy if you’re a Republican or Conservative?)  Because the M&M’s will make the difference.   Messaging and Millenials.

There needs to be a wakeup call for the Republican National Committee, because continuing along with the standard Republican modus operandi will result in a failure of catastrophic proportions.  And not just for the Republican party – but for the entire country.   Why point out messaging?  Because in spite of the good things that Republicans stand for, they can’t seem to generate any buzz, and without buzz in today’s world you are without voters.  Think about it – the entirety of social media and cable news is about buzz.  Get on the right side of it and you win.  It doesn’t matter that every policy line item in a conservative agenda makes for a sustainable, secure society.  Snore.  It doesn’t matter that most, if not all, of those line items have actually improved in people’s opinions in the last 2 years.  Crickets.  The Republicans are always 2-5 percentage points behind Democrats in all the “who do you favor” for “this-or-that-policy” polls.  For years Republicans have known that they need to do a better job of messaging, but never change their tactics.   Republicans just can’t get out of their own way.

Millenials march against and vote against HATE

You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to understand that Donald Trump won in 2016 because he knew how to create a buzz.  Maybe part of that ability was because he wasn’t really a typical Republican.  Here’s one big distinction between Republicans and Democrats:  Reason v. Emotion.  Republicans (and even some Republican politicians) are generally people with principles and a solid moral compass.  They think through issues and make their determinations grounded on facts.  Without question it’s the best way to govern – and also without question, it’s the worst way to campaign.  Democrats (and 100% of democrat politicians), on the other hand do just the opposite.  They respond to emotions.  Pictures of children in cages make them weepy and willing to vote for open borders.  Hearing hyperbolic predictions of the earth boiling up under clouds of toxic greenhouse gases will make them consider buses, bicycles, and green new deals.  Of course, none of that is reality on the ground, but that’s irrelevant to a Democrat.  They campaign with wild empty slogans like “I’m for jobs” with no actual ideas behind them.  Who could really be against jobs?  They use phrases like “we can’t rip babies out of mother’s arms” because we’re the party that ‘cares’ about children, while at the same time voting for late term abortions.   They never campaign on taking away guns.  Instead they show images of school shootings and then shout that “we need common sense gun control.”  They are masters of these tactics.  How can a rational person look at school shooting images and not agree with gun control.  The fact that their proposals simply want to take guns away from law-abiding citizens is immaterial.  It’s a horrible and hollow way to govern, but it’s a surefire winner at the voting booth. 

How to fix it:  Forget what you think are the good points of Republican policies – that requires people to think.  Create your campaign around the disastrous results of Democrat policies – and make them emotionally charged – and of course blame some Democrat personally.  Show pictures of homeless tent-cities and make the claim that this is the result of Democrat wealth re-distribution policies.  Say that Democrats are ‘personally responsible’ for it, that Democrats have blood on their hands.  Call it Pelosi Town perhaps.  It doesn’t matter that a thoughtful person wouldn’t connect the dots.  You’re not looking for the thoughtful votes.  And for goodness sake, don’t cite the constitution about protecting gun rights, freedom of speech, due process, equal justice, or religious freedoms.  Sure, you’re behind the constitution, and on solid footing with citizens who think those things are the very fabric of a successful country.  No one will care where you stand if you lose your seat.  You can’t be up at a podium and tout all the freedoms that you’re in favor of.  More crickets.  Guaranteed loser.  Never make the cardinal mistake of claiming that you’re for something.  You’ve got to demonstrate the emotional side of being against losing those freedoms. You must BLAME the other side and hang an emotional tag on them!  Messaging problem solved. 

Sanders captures the emotions of Millenials

Now add Millenials into the equation.  Like it or not, they are part of the crazy-quilt of voters.  Making disparaging remarks about them getting participation trophies, being snowflakes, and needing safe spaces is not how you win friends and influence voters   This bloc polls pretty solidly as favoring socialism more than capitalism.   A few points higher every year in fact.  New polls show this group is now about 52% pro-socialism.  From a Republican perspective (read understanding history so you don’t repeat it), this is absolute insanity.  But responses like: “they just don’t understand what socialism really is”, or “how can they say that stuff while using a smartphone and wearing $100 sneakers”, won’t resonate it will alienate.  To succeed with this group Republicans will need to ‘feel like they feel’.  Don’t be condescending – be understanding.  Republicans need to take a vastly different approach to this group.   They have wants and needs just like everyone else in the country.  Appeal – emotionally – to those needs.  You can’t make statements like “socialism is a disaster”, you need to get millennials to make that statement for you.  Use images of Venezuela maybe.  (Let me just add that nobody can feel anything but sadness and compassion for all Venezuelans right now, and it shouldn’t be taken lightly.)  There has to be lots of footage of Venezuelans looking for dinner in dumpster, or going barefoot, or not having electricity.  Make the forceful case that these images are the direct fault of Bernie’s policies.  He has this blood on his hands.  So what if he had nothing directly to do with Venezuela, he supports that government.  Make him come out and reject it.  Make him try to defend his policies with reason instead of emotion.  He can’t do it.  Then watch his supporters slip away.  And when they do, Mr. or Mrs. Republican candidate,  you will be right there with your emotional open arms for a cuddle.  I understand your pain, I can help you avoid that disaster, I just need your vote. 

Oh, and by the way, there’s a slim chance that Republicans can avoid that headline.

Survivor – Giveaway Island

So, you’re pretty certain that the Democrats have done themselves in by becoming vocal socialists?  You think that most Americans don’t want anything to do with socialism, and therefore the Republicans will run away with the upcoming elections.

Well, batman, you are completely wrong.  The socialists will sweep the floor with the conservatives!  The reason is very simple.  The power of the purse.  All the democrats (and by all the democrats I mean ALL the democrats) are now competing on the new season of Survivor – Giveaway Island. They are unabashedly socialists now.  You can hear it in their voices too.  Quite vocal.  But the reality of this season’s show is that the public doesn’t realize that they’re socialists.  Oh sure, they know Bernie is a socialist, but he doesn’t really count because he outright calls himself a socialist.  Besides, he’ll run out of energy halfway through the season and get voted off the island.

Catch the new episodes

The others try to call themselves capitalists in an effort to appeal to morons (read most republicans.)  And the public, well – the public believes them.  If you ask them about Rastamala Harris, or Pocahantas, or Spartacus, or any of the others, they’ll say “oh aren’t they democrats?”  When you go on to ask voters about their big campaign issues you’ll get answers like: “oh I think we do need universal child-care” (Poca’s big wampum drain), or “yes I think that universal health-care is a human right” (Rastamala’s thought-provoking policy), or “wow, wouldn’t it be nice to have free college tuition”, or my favorite “The New Green Monster” (this one isn’t at Fenway Park) – it goes on and on.  But wait you say – aren’t those actually socialist plans.  Of course they are.  You know it, and I know it, and most of all Rastamala and Poca and Sparty know it too.  But voters gravitate to something for ‘free’, they don’t equate it with socialism just free-ism.

And it get’s even better on Giveaway Island.  Two upcoming episodes feature the socialists climbing all over each other offering more and bigger (socialist) programs.  The winner will have to be the most creative giveaway artist on team Blue.  Let’s be honest shall we. I mean come on Poca, who really has childcare as one of the most critical issues facing the country?  Can’t you just see her at rehearsals saying to her staff “hmm, native Americans have reservations about voting for me, so what can I give away to get the pandering vote?”  And there’s Sparty?  Does he just get up in the morning and google ‘giveaway ideas near me’?  He’s latched onto reparations but we don’t see him extending it to native Americans because that would mean he’d be sending a check to Poca.  We’ll wait and see what he comes up with.

The season finale will reveal who wins the election;  of course, the socialists do.  They know full well that they can’t deliver on their campaign promises.  But that’s ok, the promises weren’t meant to be kept, the promises were just there to get elected. They don’t even have to tell voters that they scammed them.  Too late, for that.  It’s all about getting POWER.  The republicans will kick and cry, and go down to defeat along with their morals and principles.  The socialists will lie, cheat, hypocritize, and take the power.  No matter what it takes – get the power.  Machiavelli would be very proud.

Luckily for America it’s only a reality show.  Wait, what’s that?  It’s real reality (which isn’t redundant any longer.)  The socialists don’t give a hoot if they destroy the very fabric of the country.  That’s not material to them.  Only that they have the power.  We’ll be over the tipping point with the giveaways.  No going back to productive, innovative, creative, hard-working America.

And who’s the biggest loser?  You and …….

 

Victimhood Olympics

Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to the latest installment of the “Victimhood Olympics”! I’m your host for the coverage of recent events. Our game coverage will start with the hotly contested High Platform Hate-Crime Dive and then we’ll move quickly on to the 400 Meter Virtue-Signal Freestyle. But before we get to the contests, let’s recap last week’s decision by the VOBOG. In case you’re new to the VO event series, VOBOG is the acronym for Victimhood Olympics Bored of Governpeople.

Games for the New Left

No, you didn’t mis-read that, and it isn’t a typo, it is BORED, and yes Governpeople. Chairmx of the Bored, Maxine Waters, reading from a prepared statement (because she can’t go live without embarrassing herself and the Bored) said “The facts are that there’s a tremendous amount of racial animus in America. Even if it all originates on the left, we are mandating that all white people must automatically be blamed for every disparity in the country. White liberals will be given special dispensation to pronounce their guilt, say 2 Hail-Maxines, and they will be absolved. At that time they will be re-instated as virtuous. Impeach 45.” White conservatives, of course, will receive no such treatment.
Ok, now for the Hate-Crime High Dive. This week’s event was highlighted by the appearance of Jussie Smollett. Sponsored by DICK (Divers In Chicago Klub), Jussie attempted the 10 Meter Lynchpin in the tuck position with a degree of difficulty of 3.4. He needed good marks from at least 3 judges to overtake the leader, Tawana Brawley. Judge #1, Rastamala Harris, chimed in with an initial 9.5 but changed her mind (and her score) down to a 5.1 after being informed that Jussie did an illegal face-splat on entry. Judge #2 Spartacus, also had a change of heart. Initially awarding a 10.0 (the highest score awarded only to those dives that most closely fit the narrative), he later backed down to a 6.5 after seeing the angered faces of much of the nation. The third judge has yet to be assigned, but that should happen at his arraignment next week.
Moving on, we have the 400 Meter Virtue Signal freestyle. The current leader in the clubhouse is Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. Her chosen topic is every woman’s right to be believed. She cleared the first 100 meters with her performance about asking Bill Clinton to step down (20 years too late). Then followed that immediately with her public disdain for Harvey Weinstein (after his donation check cleared). She is losing a little of her lead in the third leg – the very difficult “moral compass” 100. Mired by her too often quoted “For me it’s an issue of morality”. She’s still in the lead, but there are many contenders hot on her heels. We’ll see just how many people will be willing to vote for such an obvious victim. Normally the electorate goes in for the more guarded “hey, I’m for Jobs” type.
Tune into next week’s episode to get an up close and inside-baseball look at the Hypocrisy 500, where contestants must drive Eco-Friendly vehicles powered only by cow farts .

The Unicorn and the Tennis Player

THE UNICORN AND THE TENNIS PLAYER
Here’s the basic problem with every liberal agenda item I’ve ever encountered; they’re based on some utopian concept that just cannot exist in the real world. Every one of them is a unicorn. An enchanting and wonderful thought. But upon closer examination it’s just a pony with a plastic horn strapped to its head. As the liberals openly edge closer and closer to socialism, they need to espouse fancier and fancier unicorns. Without acknowledging human nature, or just plain nature, they profess more and more unachievable platform ideas. And the childlike adherents continue to believe that it will be a wonderful world. Damn it, Santa is really coming down the chimney this year.

my little pony maybe?

Eventually though, the snake eats its own tail, and the liberals are just bigger snakes. When you unleash insane ideas with no constraints whatsoever, they begin to devour each other from the inside out. Consider the latest example. It’s a simple tale really, but a careful look at the ending should make you shudder. Let’s take a look.
Since the beginning of time the idea that there are but 2 sexes proved to be scientifically valid. Several years ago the banner of Feminism was raised, and the idea of gender equality was beaten into everyone. God help you if you questioned it or suggested that the two sexes could actually be different with different strengths and different weaknesses. You could be pilloried just for the thought. The feminist movement persisted with some good results and other not-so-good results. A good result is that the vast majority of people now don’t care if someone is gay or lesbian. But, liberals being liberals, they were not content with that. Next came the idea that we could ignore gender science all-together. (by the way, this is really rich coming from the same group that says if you don’t believe in global warming, then you’re ignoring science – but that’s a story for another article). Anyway, back to the tale at hand – transgendering. A biological man could simply announce that he wanted to become a woman (or vice-versa), and medicine could make it happen.

As usual with the liberals, they hand off their idea to the world, and disavow any responsibility for the outcomes. They also give jurisdiction to the thought-police for punishment of anyone that happens to question the validity of the idea. So off we go, no questions asked, literally. Then some unintended consequences start happening. First is the rise in men claiming to be women and wanting to use the women’s bathrooms and locker-rooms. Not so good, eh? “well, we never thought that would happen” say the liberals. Next are men in some stage of the transgendering process deciding to take advantage of ‘women’s sports’. (Of course following the feminist manifesto to its logical conclusion there can’t really be ‘women’s sports’ because we’re all equal right? Again, the subject of another article). So these almost-women start winning the trophies and the MONEY. “Ooops, we never thought that would happen”. Right. Now is when the fun begins. Here comes that nasty tail-eating snake, ready to devour itself.

martina navritolova

Martina - The Champion's Champion


Enter Martina Navratilova. World famous tennis champion. World famous lesbian. According to her website “she has spent much of her career overcoming prejudices and stereotypes, giving up millions of dollars in endorsements and sponsorship as a result of her insistence on living a life of integrity and honesty,” In other words, she’s been upfront, and out front of the sports world being a lesbian. Good for her, kudos for being true to herself. And for quite some time she’s been an on the Board of a group called Athlete Ally. Athlete Ally spends its time promoting L-G-B-T-Q-M-O-U-S-E issues in sports. (see what I did there with my little Disney reference? That’s right, another article). Stuck in the middle of that acronym is a tricky ‘t’. T is for Trans. And a certain somebody out there has an issue with transgendering men winning trophies in women’s sports. Guess who? Yep, Martina. She has been vocal that it’s patently unfair for trans-men to win piles of cash and then, if they want to, “go back to making babies” (her words). Can’t you just hear the snake’s tail whipping around? Well, Athlete Ally bounced Martina right off their board. Faceplant. Thwack. They couldn’t tolerate Martina being so intolerant. Can’t you just see the disdain dripping from the faces of the other Board members. How dare she have such integrity? A statement from Athlete Ally, which one can assume would be carefully worded so as not to offend anyone, said this is not the first time they have “approached Martina on this topic. In late December, she made deeply troubling comments across her social media channels about the ability for trans athletes to compete in sports,” They just couldn’t get her to keep quiet about it I guess. Remember she lives a life of integrity and honesty. Honesty is perhaps the value that liberals hate the most. It melts them like water on the wicked witch of the west. Can’t have honesty, because you can then tell the world that it’s just a cheapo plastic horn.
Ok, so I’m really quite ok with Athlete Ally being able to do and say what they please, and to have or not have whomever they please on their board. No issue there. Although the irony is enough to make me giggle like a school-girl (oops, did I say that out loud?) I mean schoolperson.
But let’s just drill down a slight bit further. The carefully worded Athlete Ally statement goes on to say “We reached out directly offering to be a resource as she sought further education, and we never heard back.” Yowee. Ouch. What’s that bit about Further education? It seems that Athlete Ally thinks that Martina shouldn’t be even be thinking this stuff let alone saying it out loud. And if she does just think it, means that she needs “re-educating.” And that’s the part where all the rest of us should start to quiver. Re-educating is a very Communist/1984/Brave New World/Siberia-in-winter concept. Since when do real people with real integrity (Martina) need to be “re-educated”? You know when. When they’re honest. And which agency determines who and why someone gets it? It’s too late to save Martina from being eaten by the snake, but for the rest of us………..I’m shuddering……

Hillary – The Ultimate Capitalist

I can’t help but delight in all the drama surrounding Hillary Clinton these days. Those of us on the ‘right’ seem totally to the idea that she and her husband have committed serious offenses against the nation. And she probably has. At least by all the accounts that continually get press. At the very least there’s Uranium One, Benghazi, the email server, the nebulous Clinton Foundation, and of course ‘pay-for-play’ scandals from her time as Secretary of State. Plus who knows what else may surface in the weeks or months to come. Now, if you’re like me, you are jonesing for her to be formally accused of some high crime, and taken away in shackles. In fact the image is really quite appealing. But….as NFL referees like to say “upon further review” Hillary is very different than what she first appears.
It is my contention that Hillary is the quintessential CAPITALIST. That’s right. Let’s take a look.

broke Hillary

If you recall January 20, 2001 Hillary and Bill were being evicted from their home because they were bankrupt. Oh, wait, not exactly true, but close. Hillary and Bill were leaving the White House at the end of two Bill Clinton terms as President. But the bankrupt part is true according to Hillary. They were being sued (for stealing items from the White House??) and made a public appeal for donations to their defense fund because they were ‘dead broke’ (her words). So that’s the baseline – January 2001 – dead broke. Zero, nada, outta money. Send us your $10 bills to help us pay for attorneys. Fast forward to today January 2018, seventeen years later and now worth more than $250,000,000. Pretty astounding I’d say. That means either 25 Million people sent them $10 each or they found other ways to amass a fortune. She averaged $15 Million per year not counting any spending cash. Oh, and by the way, neither of them had actual ‘jobs’ during the intervening years. Now let’s go back and look at the list of some of Hillary’s more profitable accomplishments in a different light. A light that any right-wing capitalist would be proud to shine.
So, Uranium One – let’s put giant wadges of cash into the Clinton Foundation in exchange for the ‘yes’ vote on that deal. Perfect. Skirting the law a little, but very profitable. And the Foundation itself? Operated as profitably as any corporate mogul could aspire to. It seems that there were almost no real expenses to go against the millions of dollars in annual donations. How perfect is that? Unbelievably large revenues and equally unbelievably small expenses. National Security won’t be an issue for her – because she’s planning to have so much money that she and Bill will always manage to be safe. Then let’s use a Senate seat (what capitalist wouldn’t want one of those?) to catapult into the Secretary of State position. I can just hear her waking up one day saying “Heck, while I’m here, I can use my mini bully-pulpit to strong-arm foreign nationals into paying Bill millions for speaking engagements and to get even more donations to the Foundation.” No wonder that her response to Benghazi was “what difference does it make”? She was being honest for once. It really didn’t matter to her. There wasn’t any money to be made there. A little post-script here. Has anyone made even a single dollar of donations to the Clinton Foundation since she lost the election?
All told, Hillary has done an amazing job generating capital for herself and Bill. 250 Millions worth. She is a top tier capitalist. Unfortunately for the rest of us, her brand of capitalism is the robber-baron brand. The kind that gave capitalism a bad name. Everyone, including her country, be damned. She’s in it for herself. Textbook exemplar. Now that she’s out of government we’ll need to see how she continues to make money. There’s really only one last question that we all need to answer: “What Happened”?

What the Heck?

What’s Good for the Goose – or – The Door Swings Both Ways

You’ve undoubtedly heard both of those phrases.  And I know you’ve heard “Do unto others, yadda yadda, etc. etc.”  C’mon, admit it, your parents taught you all those when you were little.  Usually they accompanied them consoling you when the bigger kids did something to you that you didn’t like, right?  And you internalized the principle as you grew up.  So now like most good people you try not to do anything that you wouldn’t want done back to you.  But that’s only half of the story, there’s a tootsie roll center there too!  Like most good philosophical principles there is something deeper hidden inside it that doesn’t make itself too clear at first glance.

By now you’re used to me asking you, in these pages, to figure out what the heck that premise has to do with anything of import in your life.  So here I go asking – can you figure it out? What exactly makes them important?  Here’s my early clue – there’s something in there that lies at the heart of what could eventually bring our nation to its knees unless we find the tootsie roll first.  You read that correctly.  The “Do unto others” line is critical to our survival as a nation.

So let’s step back and look from a distance, just for a minute, at the political climate today.  Right now I’m pretty sure that you’re thinking that the answer is somewhere in the realm of “we shouldn’t bully other countries around”.  Or maybe “America doesn’t have a good reputation in the world, so let’s try to be nicer people”.  Or “What gives us, the big country, any right to try to dictate what some foreign country does”.  Nope!  Not even close. You fell into the trap of looking only at the outside of the tootsie pop. Too easy for these pages.  Let’s delve a little deeper.

diversity poster
But UNITY is Better!

We live now in a culture that suggests, no demands, that we TOLERATE other people’s cultures, other religions, and every other “other” that comes along.  We hear political leaders stumping about being tolerant.  We instruct educators to include inclusiveness in their lesson plans.  We have religious leaders pontificating about how our religions are more alike than unalike. We must reach out and make it known that we will tolerate each other’s differences.  Americans will not be outdone in this matter.  Now don’t assume that I think this is a bad policy.  On the contrary I endorse it in the extreme.  I think it is a noble goal of an educated society.  I happen to personally like the idea that we can have a country that is at once inclusive and unified.  There are few places on the planet where tolerance is given out so freely.

But here’s the rub (isn’t there always a rub?).  All of those politicians and educators and religious leaders have only looked at the outside of the pop.  The answer lies in what we’re NOT doing!  That’s right, we’re not doing enough.  In fact we’re only doing half.  The other and equally important half is that we need to demand, from all those that we willingly tolerate, that they in turn tolerate US!  That’s the tootsie roll.  And we don’t get it, literally or figuratively.

Yes, Christians will accept Muslims, so long as Muslims accept Christians.  Yes, Whites will accept Blacks so long as Blacks accept Whites.  Yes, I will recognize your individual right to do pretty much whatever you damn please, as long as you accept my right to do the same.  And in the end, if it proves out that the other guy won’t tolerate me – then I stand by my right not to tolerate him.  That’s the “as you would have them do unto you” part.  It’s the part that speakers are always too shy to mention.  Oh, and by shy I mean scared!

Can you imagine a President standing up and saying to the country “Let’s accept and tolerate the XXX’s – but only if they accept us too – and by the way, stop trying to kill us!”  Nope, never happen.  Not unless another Teddy Roosevelt comes along.  But why not?  It is just as good for the goose, isn’t it?  But until we start demanding a bi-lateral approach, we are very likely going to tolerate ourselves right out of existence!

Who is responsible for this?

Here are two interesting stories from the news recently.  See if you can tell how they are related!

First comes a story from Ohio. The story is about a 2nd grade boy, not an ordinary 2nd grader, but a 2nd grader that tips the scales at 210 pounds!  Sound incredible? But it is true.  You know how much concern there is today regarding obesity. Seems that the state authorities are very concerned about obesity too, and they didn’t like the idea that this kid’s parents allowed him to get so big.. He could have health issues in the future, they say.  Why should we be interested?  Here’s a hint, it has nothing to do with obesity. I’m interested because the state took the child out of the home.  He was put into foster care.  That’s unfortunate in many ways, but what I wonder is – who is responsible for this?

The second story comes from Michigan. Apparently activists in Detroit got the word out that traffic accidents can be caused by people eating while motoring in the motor city. I know that I certainly get distracted from my meal if I have to stay in my lane.  Of course there was a public outcry. So, being the leaders that they are, the town fathers outlawed eating behind the wheel. Driving under the influence of a Happy Meal makes them very unhappy now. But what I really wonder is – who is responsible for this?  

What’s your guess on how these first two stories are connected?  Food you say ??  I think not – that would be too obvious.

Here’s the connection – (and I gave a few hints earlier) – Its not food, it is a matter of responsibility. I know that you guessed that. So who’s responsible for the obese boy? It’s the boy’s parents you say. Oops, you guessed wrong that time. Who’s responsible for the spilled taco?  The Driver? – wrong again Batman!  It’s the government of course.  You see when the state gets into the act then, by default, the state becomes the responsible party. And in a very short while, we all begin to expect the state to handle the problems of childhood obesity and driving under the influence of french fries.  And we quickly lose our own ability to take charge.  We will look to the government to take all the chowing drivers off of the road and to take all the obese children out of their homes.  All in an effort to protect us.  I suspect that by now you are asking if this is going anywhere. Of course it is, let’s go;

There are two factions in our society. One wants you to be responsible for yourself. For your own safety and health and finances, etc. This is the way that your parents or grandparents (if you’re lucky enough to be under 30) tried to bring you up.  The second faction thinks that the government should be responsible for everyone. For everyone’s safety and health and finances, etc. Everything.  Unfortunately this second group is taking over. As a society, we are sliding into the arena where the government does it all.  When the government is responsible for everyone, then everyone except you has the ability determine your life.

So if you don’t take proper care of your kids – in their eyes- then they can take your kids away. Soon enough it will extend to other things.  Maybe if they decide that you must vaccinate your kids (oops too late we’re there already).  Or maybe they’ll determine that every kid gets a trophy at the end of the year, so that nobody’s feelings get hurt ( double oops – we’re there already too)  Maybe they’ll decide that you can’t give them expensive sneakers because some families can’t afford them.  But only they can decide – for you!  When the state gets involved with things like eating and driving – then it won’t be long before there is a law against other things while driving. Think of all the things that can distract you while you’re driving. No cell phones (triple oops – already an issue) No radio maybe. What about kids in your car?  Anyone that has ever driven with little kids in the backseat knows just how distracting that can be. I suggest that we limit the number of kids allowed to just one per car. And forget about dates in your car.  Much safer don’t you think. So, hopefully now you can see the result.  It really is what YOU think – YOU get to decide for the other people but not for yourself!  So stop and think before you jump on the ‘let’s make a law’ bandwagon – for anything.  C’mon, hop in the car, let’s go get some fries!

Sleeper Cell French Fries attack America!

I know it sounds like a bad Japanese science fiction movie.  I didn’t believe it myself, at first.  But it is true.  A group of California scientific researchers have recently uncovered a heinous plot to attack the youth of America. Homeland security commented that they didn’t hear any of the typical back-channel chatter, but actually became aware of it via a newspaper story. The plot revolves around a huge corporation that up until now was viewed as one of the great American success stories.

a typical cheeseburger
secret sauce? or secret agent?

Just how this corporation kept this under cover for so long is a mystery.  Their name has been associated with lunch-time smiles on the faces of kids for decades!   The researchers notified a group of concerned citizens, and that group brought it all into the light of day.  According to the group the so-called ‘happy meal’ is actually causing the downfall of American youth by literally force-feeding them fatty foods.  Thereby causing obesity – and the eventual downfall of the entire country.  What makes the episode so shocking is that the parents of the beset children had no idea that they were under attack – and had even less of an idea that their children were being compelled by a secret sauce – I mean force – to consume large quantities of the meals.  The researchers have yet to determine exactly what the force is behind the compulsion, but they are certain that it is definitely NOT the fault of parents, who seem to be blameless since they cannot be expected to counteract the children’s wishes.  Corporate officials have denied any covert operation.  However, in retribution for the charges, the company has replaced the fries with a packet of apple slices.  This, in turn, has precipitated children’s groups to protest that the corporation be forced to rename it’s product to the ‘Less-than-Happy’ meal.

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”
Thomas Jefferson

Of course the real story here begins with the idea that the government should take responsibility for every citizen, and that the citizens should have none of their own.   If you agree that french fries can cause obesity, and not lack of parental supervision, then you must also agree that there are plenty of other foods that cause obesity.

chocolate chip cookie
are these next to go?

This is more than just a ‘slippery slope’. .  There are recent examples of us sliding down this slope.  We start with activists brandishing a ‘good’ cause, and we end up giving the government more responsibility for us, and losing some liberties in the bargain.  No Smoking on airplanes – a good idea.  Then no smoking in restaurants – a less good idea (we can discuss why in another article).  Then no smoking in public buildings and on streets – and now there are entire towns where it is illegal to smoke.  So here we go – no fatty ‘happy’ meals for kids.  Then no chocolate cake at birthday parties – because kids are forced to attend them, so we shouldn’t be allowed to serve cake!  Think that’s extreme?  I don’t.  I think it’s just the next wave.  After that, no chocolate chip cookies – they’re just as bad if you eat the whole bag, and god knows that mom can’t be responsible for keeping her kids out of the cookie jar.  This is what happens when we decide that the government should take care of us all.  Now, if you don’t like happy meals, or chocolate cake, or smoking, then you probably think this is all good stuff.  But I’m sure that there’s something that you do like that other people think is harmful to you.  That’s right – THEY – think it’s harmful to YOU.  And they’ll lobby to make sure that you can’t do it or have it any more – because it’s bad for YOU.  If you sit by quietly and let them take away the happy meals, they will come for you too some day, I assure you.  It will be easier for them to get you too – because you will be pedalling the government approved bicycle (no more auto fumes), down a dirt road (asphalt is hazardous), We’ll know exactly where you are, because every bike will have a GPS chip (to deter bike thieves).   And you’ll be leaving a trail of half-eaten celery – organic celery – because that’s the only food known to science that is completely fat free, taste free, liberty free.

Fox News vs. CNN

Here’s the headline:

Obama resembles Thomas Jefferson.  Gingrich channels John Adams.

Welcome to America. Polarized America that is.  Gone is the good ol’ Red, White and Blue America, now we’re down to only Red or Blue.  Everyone knows whether they live in a Red State or a Blue State.  When we’re in our cars, if we’re not listening to music, we listen to Red talk or Blue talk.  We read Blue newspapers or Red newspapers, but not both.  And of course, we watch Red news or Blue news on television. Oh, and by Red news I mean Fox News and by Blue News I mean CNN.  There’s no attempt at purple by either of the top two entertainment news networks.

shows the fox news logo I say entertainment news because that is largely what they have become.  They’re like real reality shows (can I say that without being redundant? again).   They take daily events and beam them out to their audiences filtered through their (red or blue) colored lenses.  If you take a snapshot of their websites you will see two completely different takes on the day’s events. Almost as if the networks themselves were in two different countries.  shows the cnn logo Now, some people today are disturbed by this.  They worry that you are getting your news skewed with one ideology or the other.  And you are.  They worry that the great majority of middle America is unaware of the situation.  And they are.  But mostly they worry that this causes a polarizing bias on both sides.  And it does.

Here’s the rub.  We Americans take our politics very very seriously.  We live it and breathe it.  But this polarization of the news is not news.  It isn’t even a new situation.  Fox didn’t invent it and neither did CNN.  Here’s where we do the look ahead – look back thing that I love to do.

I’ll bet that you would be surprised if I said that President Obama and Harry Reid have lots in common with Thomas Jefferson!  Don’t go sticking your tongue out yet (because you could easily step on it).  I’ll bet you’d be surprised by my suggestion that Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain bear some distinct resemblances to John Adams! OK, maybe those two ideas are a bit of a stretch.  But there is a huge connection here.  You see, the polarizing press has existed almost from the very beginning of our country.  And almost continually ever since.  Starting right with the Presidential election of 1800.  That election deserves a bigger place in our national memory bank.  It was the very first time that there were two candidates opposing each other.  Up until that, George Washington took two terms uncontested.  With Washington there was no need for political parties.  He was the unanimous choice of the electors.  BUT – starting with the Adams/Jefferson election there suddenly were parties.  With the parties came heated and divisive oratory on both sides.  AND this is where it gets really interesting – Adams and Jefferson both had newspapers that worked directly for them, that they actually funded!  The editors wrote the stories that they wanted written, and trashed the opposition the way that they wanted them trashed. In retrospect, Obama and Gingrich can’t hold a candle to Adams and Jefferson.  They’re literal (or literary) babes in the woods by comparison.  No, I don’t really believe that Obama resembles Jefferson.  Jefferson was so much more accomplished at the task.  And Gingrich, he kind of does resem…..  (forget that).  So the lineage of Fox and CNN goes back over 200 years.  It didn’t seem to damage the national psyche in the interim.  It most likely won’t damage it now either.  But in order to get a truly ‘fair and balanced’ portrayal of the world, you need to watch a little Red and a little Blue.  Or get yourself a pair of HD-3D multi-color reading glasses.

Diversity – good? or bad?

“Oft expectation fails…  and most oft where most it promises”          Helena – All’s Well that Ends Well               William Shakespeare

 

Do you have a pet cause?  An ideology that stirs you up?  Here’s a tip that will help you achieve your goal.  If you choose the terminology before your opponents do – you will be able to set the terms of the debate!  The naming rights here are just as important as they are for sports arenas.  If you’d like an example here’s one. Consider the abortion controversy. The first guys in were the “right to life” advocates. Of course that would leave their opponents with the “right to kill” moniker – not a name that would garner much popular support.  So the other guys counter with “pro-abortion” which is a much more gentle spin, but still not really the positive connotation that they could have gotten for their cause if they were first into the fray.  Round one always goes to the guys with the naming rights.

Here’s another example. A cause celeb in current events is the immigration debate.  The first guys in this battle were the people that want open borders.  Their banner is “Diversity”.  Now this group has done an outstanding job at setting the terms of the debate and they are hosting it on the Politically Correct playing field too.  It has become so PC in fact, that the people on the other side of the debate can’t even come up with a good name for their team!

“Diversity is strength”. I know you’ve heard that tagline. “Embrace everyone’s cultural background”.  How could you be against that?  You can see why the naming rights are so important.  You’d have to be a Neanderthal to argue against their terms, – a ‘right-to-kill’ sort. The diversity group has overwhelmed their nameless opposition with a deluge of these one-sided debates.  Now, in an effort to stay within the PC boundaries, I must state unequivocably that I am definitely not against immigration – from anywhere on the globe.  I embrace the cultural history of America as being the great “melting pot”.  This mixture of peoples and cultures was a part of our history from the very beginning.  Wanderers and adventurers from every other country have settled in America, and it is part of the reason why we have States and not just a singular “country” like every other government that came before us.  But the process of absorbing newer arrivals hasn’t always been easy.  In fact it has never been easy, either for the new arrivals or for the people that were already here.  But it always found a way to work itself out.  Even though everyone expected that the trials of becoming American were sometimes grueling, new people still came here, still saw America as the best hope for freedom in the world.  And after paying for the privilege they embraced the ideas of being American.  The end result was that we grew, we chugged along, we engaged the dreams of the entire world.

Then something changed.  We got soft-hearted.  Suddenly we wanted to make it easier for people.  Make their journey easier, make it “toll free”.  Since we are a free nation, everyone should be able to bring their cultures here as a free, but separate, group.  It’s called Diversity.  Today we are being told that keeping diversity makes us strong.  A forward thinking idea, except that if you have that expectation, it will fail where it promises most.

Once again we can learn from history (remember the whole premise of this blog site).  One example from history is still right in front of our eyes today.  It’s printed on the Seal of The United States.  There’s a little tagline written there – (albeit in Latin so you need to translate it) – E Pluribus Unum!  What, you don’t have latin, ok I’ll translate it for you – literally it is “Out of Many, One”.  Meaning UNITY.

e Pluribus Unum
the Great Seal of the United States

We took all of the states and UNITED them into The United States of America.  How long do you suppose that we would have existed as the Diverse States of America?

If you don’t let the other guy frame the debate, it is particularly easy to see that diversity is not strength, but a weakness.  More history coming – can you feel it? here it is –  Even the ancient Romans knew that diversity is weakness.  One of their favorite practices while they were conquering the western world was – DIVIDE and CONQUER.  They divided along the lines of diversity.  Caesar knew it and I’ll bet you knew it too.  I’ll also bet that the diversity side wouldn’t want you to make the association.  What all of this means is that we should still welcome all of the huddled masses from other places on the globe.  It really is quite enriching to embrace them.  But we should also require them to go through the same process as every other huddled mass before them.  In the end, in return for our embracing them, they need to embrace what being American is all about – It’s called being United!  ‘When in Rome, do as the Romans do’.