Blog Archives

September Topics

9/2/2017

This is a wild month as there's so much to cover with things like gender identity and race relations. I had to cover buzz words like Micro Aggression and White Privilege. I also covered the issue of raising taxes on the wealthy and the implications of doing this. There's much more of course.

On the lighter side this month I wrote about the amazing attributes of the Bald Eagle and Barn Owl. Is there an edge to our universe? The importance of personal peace. The Earth's core. I covered both Glenn Campbell and Tom Cruise. Even if you don't like Tom for particular reasons, you'll probably respect his amazing accomplishments because he's not just an actor.

Anyhow, it's a great month with a lot of controversial articles. One thing I'd hope you'd keep in mind while reading this site is that although I attack Democrats, LiberaIs, and/or Progressives a lot, I do so in general as I know not everyone falls into the same category as far as their ideology regarding certain issues. For example Republicans are split regarding abortion. I do believe the Left is more divisive. They take countless issues and create emotional division among U.S. citizens and this isn't good for our country. This is what bothers me the most and why I have the tone I do in some of my articles.

But the fact is, I don't like either political party. Politicians live by different rules than the rest of us. Their moral compasses are different in that so many of them believe the end justifies the means. Both parties mislead us so they lack integrity when they point their fingers at the other party for wrongdoings. I mention this to let you know that I could easily write about issues I have with the Republican Party but in prioritizing the problems I have with our political system, I find far more dangerous components related to the strategies and tactics Democrats are using so that's the focus of my writings.

Thanks so much for visiting this site and I ask once again that if you come across any articles that are interesting, that you'll copy and paste them into an email and send to your contacts who might be interested. Also, if you think this website is worthy, please let your contacts know. We're inundated with liberal ideology and they spin the who, what, when, where, and more importantly, the "why" behind various stories. I try very hard to provide a truthful perspective into politics and social issues to provide another viewpoint which counters theirs.

The Politics of Hurricane Harvey

9/2/2017

I'm sure that like me your heart has been crushed by some of the scenes from the carnage and also like me that your heart has been lifted by the amazing humanitarian stories. I have family and friends who live in Houston and they've been fortunate and have been spared from the major flooding.

What I find disgusting is that during this tragedy with so many good humanitarian stories taking place, that Democrats and the mainstream media choose to attempt to divide our country through trashing President Trump and Melania. It started with Melania's shoes as she left the White House to travel to Texas. People were dying in the flood zone and the press is busy attacking her for her footwear. She wasn't walking around in high heel shoes when she arrived in Houston she was wearing tennis shoes but regardless, it was ridiculous to receive the coverage it did. On the day the New York Times covered it, it was the most clicked on article on their website. No wonder their readers overwhelmingly vote Democrat. I wish they cared more about the articles on our economy.

Now they're attacking Trump for not showing the level of empathy that they deemed appropriate. There were still major evacuations underway so his trip was about meeting with the emergency response teams and reassuring them they'd have the necessary resources from the Federal Government to do what they needed to do during the flooding and down the road as they rebuild.

I've been through a terrible tornado and I made it through Hurricane Hugo. My concern was finding food and water and getting our electricity back; a hug from the President wouldn't have been any help to me. President Obama hugged Governor Christie for a nice photo-op but it certainly didn't help relief efforts for the citizens of New Jersey because it ended up being a fiasco.

Trump went in as the Chief Executive Officer and prioritized their needs. He and Melania are back in Houston today to talk to the victims who are now safely in shelters to show their support. This way they won't have interfered with the recovery efforts. But this isn't good enough. Now I'm hearing the mainstream media say he's only doing this because they forced him to. Think about this. Why in the world would they say this? Why do they find it so necessary to divide our country at a time where people are coming together regardless of gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, etc.? If you look up the definition for "Treason" it includes harming one's country and/or attempting to overthrow the government. Are Democrats reaching this point?

It amazes me in times like these how all the junk we get caught up in like gender and race issues, that everyone throws all of that aside and becomes one. I saw white men in ball caps (what some liberals call rednecks), pulling an African American family out of the water. They ended up holding hands and hugging each other. I saw an African American man on a jet ski, taking an older woman out of her flooded house and she was holding on to him as they sped off. Race was thrown out the window while everyone worked together to help each other.

If you really think about it, the fact that we do talk about issues like Micro Aggression and Safe Spaces, goes to show how blessed we are to live in the U.S. While most countries in the world are dealing with issues like food, housing, and access to clean water, we have young adults protesting and rioting because of perceived unfairness in our society. Most of these young people have a place to stay and certainly plenty of food and water. It's time to count our blessings that our issues are so minor compared to the rest of the world.

A Great Quote

9/1/2017

I don't know who made this statement but I love it: "The same boiling water that can soften a potato can also harden an egg. It’s about what you’re made of not the circumstances."

DACA

9/1/2017

There’s a lot of heated talk about a southern border immigration policy which was an Executive Order by President Obama and it’s called the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which there are around 800,000 Hispanics enrolled from Mexico and Central America; this is half what the Obama Administration expected. Regardless of whether the program is good or not, it would be dangerous to allow a President the ability to choose without the Legislative Branch being involved, who can and who can’t enter our country.

Immigration laws have always fallen under the Legislative Branch because of the security implications and the financial burden it places on particular states. The states who are hardest hit financially when immigration laws are created or changed like Arizona and Texas, have a right to representation as it affects their state budgets. Obama bypassed the citizens of these states because they didn’t have a chance to be represented by their legislators. This is exactly why there’s a need for separation of powers.

Liberals are of course trashing Trump over this issue (actually all issues), and there are protest around our country when it isn’t true that Trump is ending DACA; he’s just saying let’s make it legal. Why in the world wouldn’t we do that? Both parties knew Obama’s Executive Order was a legal risk and that’s why both the House and Senate had already put together separate legislation to address it but it didn’t make it to the floor for a vote. Instead of allowing the Legislative Branch to slide, Trump cancelled DACA and forced both parties to get to work and get it done.

Did you know that both parties already knew DACA was in danger even when Obama was in office and that both attempted to put forth legislation? This isn’t some crazy racist scheme by President Trump. The mainstream media didn’t share this information about DACA already being scrutinized before Trump came along because they knew it wouldn’t fit their narrative and instead wanted to stoke the fire under Progressives.

There’s absolutely no doubt in my mind that DACA (in a moderately revised form), would pass the House and Senate. Democrats know Republicans will work with them on this issue but still they’re running around making it sound like the “Dream” is over because of President Trump. Yet again, they’re putting Party over country as they’re constantly trying to divide our nation especially regarding race relations. There are already lawsuits being filed against Trump’s decision even though Trump has every legal right to remove an Executive Order, Presidents do it all the time. The people filing the lawsuits know they can’t win, they just want the press and the mainstream media is happy to give it to them.

It makes perfect sense that President Trump cancelled Obama’s Executive Order but when it comes to DACA itself and what Obama was trying to accomplish, I have to say that most of it made sense to me. With this in mind, if our legislators worked together to create legislation that would cover these “Dreamers” I think it would be great for our country and I’ll explain why.

To be eligible for DACA illegal immigrants must have entered the United States before their 16th birthday and must be attending school, be a high school graduate, in the military or honorably discharged from the military, not have a criminal record including misdemeanors, or pose a threat to national security. The program also doesn’t provide eligibility for Federal welfare or student aid.

The reason I say DACA could be great for our country and this is embarrassing to say, but if they met the above qualifications, they’d be more of an asset to our country than millions of young people who are U.S. citizens but are a drain on our society because they don’t finish high school, they don’t serve in the military, they don’t work, they commit crimes etc.

My biggest issue is that we don’t enforce the immigration laws we have on the books now. Either get rid of them or enforce them. If we did get rid of the illegal immigrants who are a drain on our society and kept the good ones around who fit DACA standards, it only makes sense that we’d improve our economy because they aren’t the ones who bring wages down instead they are helping to grow our GDP.

I read what was supposed to be a negative report about DACA where it stated: “Don’t be fooled, most of these Dreamers aren’t little kids instead their average age is 22 years old.” The fact is, this isn’t a bad thing as this means that on average those who are in the DACA program are actually old enough to work and are contributing to our economy through their spending and the various taxes they pay (i.e. Federal Income, payroll, property, sales, State Income, etc.).

Even Democrats know that President Trump did the legal and right thing for these “Dreamers” through getting rid of an Executive Order and allowing it to become legitimate legislation. This would give these young people stability because Executive Actions and Orders are at the whim of the President and can be taken away at any time.

Democrats knew DACA was on the chopping block the moment it was signed but they are going to make sure that anything the Trump Administration does even when it’s good, is villainized as they position themselves for the 2018 mid-term elections.

It appears that to play in the big leagues of politics that you must leave your integrity at the door and be ready to use situational ethics and apply situational morality to stay in the game. It’s certainly not for the feint of heart.

Gender Identity Confusion

9/1/2017

My state of North Carolina received terrible press over the “Bathroom Bill” where liberals were attacking the citizens of our state for not supporting the LGBT community; we even had several concerts and sporting events cancelled because of the Bill.

What liberals don’t want to talk about and why there was an issue in North Carolina is that it wasn’t clear who could enter which restrooms. Liberals stated that a person should be able to go into the restroom of the gender he or she identifies with. This means a man wearing a business suit could go into the ladies’ room as long as he says he identifies with being a female. It doesn’t matter whether someone has transitioned and is now wearing the clothes that are applicable, they just have to say they’re female or male and that’s all it takes to be female or male.

Many citizens in North Carolina were concerned that it would make girls and women uncomfortable to have someone dressed as a male going into their restroom. Many people felt that women’s rights were being violated by allowing this. Keep in mind most of those opposing weren’t concerned about those who had already physically transitioned into their new gender and were already living the lifestyle including the clothes they wore.

But here’s the biggest issue with what liberals are pushing; if it’s okay to choose whether you’re a man or a woman regarding the restroom issue, why wouldn’t it be applicable anywhere? If all it takes is to say you’re a man or a woman why couldn’t a man who gets convicted of a crime say he’s a woman so he can go to a women’s prison? I’m sure he’d much rather go to a women’s prison than a men’s. Based on the criteria they’re using for restrooms why wouldn’t it be applicable in cases like these?

How about a man who has transitioned to a woman and is competing in women’s sports? This is a heated issue as many studies have shown that hormone adjustments in men who want to transition doesn’t take away the male DNA which makes them physically stronger than women. I can promise you that a good male basketball player who says he’s a woman and joins the WNBA would be able to block shots and dunk all day; how would that be fair to the women?

There are professional women cyclists who are complaining about trans-genders who have come in and dominated races. Keep in mind I’m talking about people who have actually transitioned which doesn’t have to be the case according to the current criteria; all you have to do is say you’re a particular gender and that is good enough to gain access to restrooms, showers, sports teams, etc.

It would be ludicrous to run our society based on self-gender identification. There is all kinds of money available to women who run small businesses (the Federal Government allocates $11 billion a year), so based on the current criteria, what would prevent me from saying I’m a woman and enjoying some of the money being issued?

Until now, I haven’t been able to receive an extremely low interests business loan for being a woman because there are standards (i.e. birth certificate, name, social security number, in person interview, etc.), but based on the new direction we’re going to placate the LGBT community, all of this would be thrown out and there are no standards the government can put on me to challenge my claim to gender.

If I could say I’m a woman and not get into trouble for going into the women’s restroom then why wouldn’t I also have the right to use the women’s shower at my local Y.M.C.A.? There aren’t adult restrooms in most grade schools so based on what the liberals are saying why couldn’t I go into the little girl’s restroom? Based on the gender identity rules they’re pushing nothing could stop me. Don’t these innocent children have a right to feel comfortable and safe?

How far could we take this liberal ideology of self-gender identification and rights? If they say that biology doesn’t matter and we get to choose how we define ourselves, then why couldn’t a white high school student say he’s African American and then start using the system to gain admission to college and receive scholarships designated for African Americans? Why is this identity concept any different than gender? It’s not.

If someone has physically transitioned and is now living the lifestyle of their new gender identity including clothing (which is the only way we could truly tell from the outside which gender they associate with), then I don’t have a problem with them using women’s facilities (or vice-versa for men). Let me reiterate that I’m talking about physically transitioned because I don’t think it’s right or mentally healthy to subject young girls and women to men’s genitalia in a locker room or restroom. Don’t they have a right to this protection?

The bottom line is why would any of us support LBGT legislation regarding public access unless it clearly identifies who can and who can’t go into particular public facilities which are gender specific. It should clearly address how a situation is handled if someone doesn’t follow the rules. Can he or she be arrested? Can they be subject to a civil suit?

The citizens of North Carolina had no clarity regarding these issues yet Democrats tried to make it sound like we have a bunch of rednecks living here who don’t support the LGBT community which isn’t true. This is too important an issue with many variables to be crammed down the throats of U.S. citizens.

I can’t imagine the horror and shock on the faces of the young girls and women at my Y.M.C.A. when I take a shower with them. If I’m confronted, all I’ll have to say is: “Back off, I identify with being a woman!” Isn't this a scary thought.

If you agree with me regarding this topic please go to the website of each of your legislators and copy and paste this article in their contact form; I think the message is clear.

White Privilege

9/1/2017

This is one of the latest buzz phrases around the country but it’s a terrible mentality to possess. When African Americans and Hispanics say there’s white privilege then what they’re really saying is they are inferior because of their skin color. It’s so sad if anyone really thinks this. Based on the definition of “racism,” if I said I had white privilege I’d be a racist because I’d be saying that the color of my skin makes me better than other people who aren’t white.

I’m Caucasian yet there are millions of minorities who are smarter, better looking, and wealthier than I am. There are thousands of African American actors, athletes, and musicians whose children are starting off in life with a lot more “privilege” than millions of white Americans. Should this be called: “Black Privilege?” I hope not.

Which reminds me, the NAACP is discussing boycotting the NFL because the former quarterback for San Francisco (Colin Kaepernick), hasn't been picked up by any NFL teams after he walked out on his contract. Of course Kaapernick is the player who wouldn't stand up during the National Anthem because he believes our country is racist. The NAACP is saying that Colin doesn't have a job because the NFL teams are owned by white people. If this is the case, why are 70% of the NFL rosters filled by African Americans? It appears to me that these white owners might be the least racist of any group in the country, they just care about winning. The only color they're not color blind too is green.

This is a great example of what we're up against. The NAACP which should be focused on babies out of wedlock, crime, high school dropout rates, people on government assistance, etc., instead is focusing their efforts on a millionaire athlete and trying to manufacture a case of racism which is so ridiculous that I cringe anytime I hear one of their representatives try to prove their case.

NFL teams make money by winning. I guarantee you they don't care about a quarterback's race or sexual orientation as long as he can help them win games. It's this simple. I'll reiterate before I move on, 70% of the athletes on NFL teams are African American, when it comes to the millions of dollars that can be made in sports, it's not a privilege being white.

I don’t believe white privilege is systemic in today’s day and age. What exists is something that has always existed and this is economic privilege. Hillary Clinton made many mistakes and one of the major ones was for her to attack white people. There are pockets all around our country of white people (like in Appalachia), where there's generational poverty. Millions of economically challenged whites voted for Trump because Hillary said if you’re white you’re privileged and they certainly knew this was a lie.

Liberals like to focus on the percentage of African Americans in poverty and not the actual raw data which shows close to 25 million whites are living in poverty compared to around 10 million blacks. She even called these people deplorable. She did all this yet somehow she wouldn’t admit to playing a part in losing the election. Instead, she’s used the usual Democrat tactic of playing the “victim” card and making it sound like everyone was working against her.

My greatest concern with the mentality that some minorities have regarding there being white privilege is that it only serves to hold them back and the fact is our country would be much better off if everyone understood their true potential and worked to achieve it instead of playing victim and forever selling themselves short.

The fact is white people don't have built in their DNA the ability to make good choices for their lives. I grew up relatively poor but ended up by most standards as very successful. I didn't do it on my own, I'm where I am today because of my mentors, parents, siblings, teachers, etc. It would dishonor them to believe it was the color of my skin that was behind my success. They deserve better.

With this in mind, there's nothing in African American or Hispanic DNA that would cause them to make poor choices for their lives. It is the people in their lives who can help them achieve success; Doctor Ben Carson sure did. He grew up in the projects and became one of the greatest neurosurgeons in the country. In his case, his mom is the one who made the difference and helped him became the great man he is today. Because he had this amazing mentor, he made good decisions for his life.

The moral to my post is that it isn't skin color that determines ones future it's the people in our lives and the choices we make. Statistics show overwhelmingly that an African American female who graduates high school, gets an entry-level job, and doesn't have a child out of wedlock, will make it out of poverty. She would climb the economic ladder and the odds are that when she does get married and has children, they will experience an even better economic future. If a Caucasian female doesn't graduate high school, has a child out of wedlock, and doesn't begin working, she'd end up in poverty. Her skin color would not help her overcome poor choices for her life.

Claiming white privilege is a liberal tactic to reduce personal responsibility. Whites do not hold other ethnic groups back. They did, but there are no laws in place now that put African Americans at a disadvantage because both they and the Republican Party fought hard for their equality. This statement makes Democrats mad but the truth is the truth. The bottom line is being white won't overcome poor choices. I don't consider it a privilege to be white but that's because I'm not a racist.

The Earth's Core

9/1/2017

While researching the Earth’s inner and outer core I realized that scientists are doing what they sometimes do and that is provide information that if you dig deep enough (no pun intended), you realize it is a bit unscientific. Many of the reports I read regarding the Earth’s core are filled with words like: believed, deduced, hypothesized, etc. From what I’ve seen, a lot of their descriptions of the core are based on speculation even though they treat it as fact not theory.

The Earth’s core is 4,000 miles from the Earth’s surface and it’s around 9,800 degrees. I can certainly see where scientists could calculate the distance to the center of the Earth but knowing the actual size of the core, what it’s made of, and how hot it is down there, when the deepest hole ever drilled in the Earth has only been eight miles down, makes it a little difficult to grasp.

Thermal imaging is limited in distance and it certainly isn’t going to send electronic sound waves 4,000 miles and back. They also say there’s an iron–nickel alloy ball at the Earth’s core; how could they know this without taking samples? The bottom line is there aren’t scientific tools necessary to confirm anything yet students everywhere are learning about the Earth’s core without knowing its mostly speculation at this point.

This isn’t unlike how some scientists treat the Big Bang as fact when it’s actually a theory. It could be correct but good luck figuring out how they measured an event from 40 billion years ago. As with the Earth’s core, they could be correct but at least admit it doesn’t meet scientific standards for fact-based conclusions. If scientists can’t agree on what the status of our solar system was 20,000 years ago how could they predict an event that occurred 40 billion light years away?

My purpose for this article is that we should all be careful about taking information from the scientific community and assuming it’s factual just because they’re smart people. If we don’t perform due diligence in these situations and ask ourselves regarding their claims: “How do they know that?” then we’ll be like sheep naively following the herd; a Knowledge Seeker definitely isn’t a sheep.

The National Endowment of the Arts

9/1/2017

I’ve written about this organization before and brought up some of the outrageous “art” exhibits they sponsor that are vulgar in an average person’s eyes like a portrait of someone urinating on a Bible. It’s almost like the more outlandish the art exhibit the more funding they get for pushing the envelope.

The foundation also sponsors the ballet, operas, and symphony orchestras which are generally attended by people with plenty of money to pay for tickets without them needing to be subsidized by taxpayer dollars.

But what I didn’t mention before as I just came across the information recently is that the foundation has 432 employees with an average salary and benefit package of a whopping $126,415 a year (2016). This is beyond outrageous. These people are making around four times what an average employee in the private sector makes and you and I are paying for their lavish lifestyles through our tax dollars.

Democrats are trying to make it sound like Republicans don’t care about the “Arts and Humanities” when this isn’t the case. The reason there’s a push on Capitol Hill to get rid of the agency is due to ridiculous projects which are being funded, money going to undeserving organizations, then of course there’s the public employees getting rich working for the organization. These are just some of the reasons why Republicans are out to get rid of the National Endowment of the Arts and it makes perfect sense. How unusual for the Democrats and mainstream media to not share the real reasons Republicans have for getting rid of this agency.

Democrats Racism Towards Asian-Americans

9/1/2017

There’s no question based on college administrations across the country especially at Ivy League schools with limited admission, that Asian-Americans who are much more qualified academically are being turned away in favor of African American students who do not have even close to the same qualifications. This isn’t some right-wing conspiracy as the empirical data is overwhelming.

So why is this? The Civil Rights Act doesn’t just apply to African Americans as its intent is to lock down equal opportunity for all. Maybe it’s just me but I can think of no other reason for the Asian-American community to have fewer rights than African Americans other than their small voting blocks. African Americans have leverage with the Democrat Party so the Party’s focus is on pushing their rights through quotas on college campuses while taking slots away from Asian-Americans. If Democrats were truly principled and believed in the Civil Rights Act, wouldn’t they care about every ethnic group and not just the group that continues to elect them?

An Asian-American group is now working with the Department of Justice to investigate the standards colleges are using to ensure their Constitutional Rights are not being infringed upon; to them I say: “Good luck!”

I don’t know how many of the mainstream media commented on this issue but I do know the Huffington Post and New York Times wrote op-eds. In their articles they made it sound like white people were against African Americans getting preferred admissions and didn’t mention that it was specifically the Asian-American community that was arguing for their rights. Think about how corrupt this is; yet another reason they are called fake news.

I’ve said it before, but for anyone to think they’re intellectually advanced about political and social issues because they read these liberal publications they’re only fooling themselves. They blatantly mislead readers and viewers to push their liberal agendas. They are corrupt.

Does Raising Taxes Boost an Economy?

9/1/2017

I’ve heard many liberals talk about how the U.S. economy was booming in the late 40’s and 50’s and that the tax rate was as high as 90%. They make this claim in an effort to raise current income tax brackets up to 80%. But this is an important point they conveniently leave out and that is our economy wasn’t booming because of an increase in taxes (which would be ridiculous), it was thriving because the rest of the industrialized world was flattened during the war and we were the “go to” country for practically everything manufactured. During this time in our history anyone who could possibly work (men and women), were working including many teenagers.

For liberals to talk about the good old days of a robust economy and high taxes is completely ludicrous because it doesn’t account for the boom our economy had due to manufacturing during and after the war. The question to ask is how great would the economy have been if more money stayed in the hands of the taxpayers? As other countries got up and running again our manufacturing slowed and our economy began to go south so taxes were reduced. Why aren’t liberals sharing this bit of truth?

This isn’t unlike when Democrats talk about how great the economy was under Bill Clinton but can’t cite anything he did policy wise that would’ve made the economy take off. He benefited from the dot.com boom and Bush got caught in it when it crashed. Clinton didn’t do anything to make the market boom and Bush didn’t put forth any economic policies that made the market crash. The problem was that the dot.com world was ahead of its time. It took more and better applications for both the private and public sector for it to take hold like it has now.

I truly don’t get the Left’s argument about higher taxes, why in the world would giving the Federal Government more money grow our economy more than keeping as much as possible of it in our hands to spend how we see fit? They make it sound like taxpayers would make worse decisions about where to spend their money than the Federal Government would; it’s crazy talk.

Let me put it in simple terms that even a Progressive could understand; if having a high-end tax rate of 80% is so great for our economy, why not make it a 100%? If the economic principle they’re selling is good at 80% then why wouldn’t it be even better at 100%? Needless to say, their argument is completely illogical. The bottom line is that redistributing wealth is immoral because you steal from one person to give to another.

Fair share actually means paying the same percentage of taxes. For example if we had a 25% flat tax rate with no deductions then a family making $50,000 would pay $12,500 in taxes and a family bringing in $100,000 would pay $25,000 in taxes. The more you make the more you pay but everyone would be paying the decided upon fair share of 25%.

Although liberals use the phrase “fair share” to create division among economic classes it isn’t what they really want; they want to punish people who have succeeded by making them pay more than their fair share because it’s a way to get votes. Democrats create the perception that the rich (which are a minority), are taking advantage of those less fortunate because it’s been an easy sell since the beginning of mankind. Is there a way we can officially change the name of the Democrat Party to the Division Party?

<<Previous

Author: John Mann

Archives