Webster

The Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions." --American Statesman Daniel Webster (1782-1852)


Showing posts sorted by relevance for query political correctness. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query political correctness. Sort by date Show all posts

Wednesday, January 31, 2018

Political Correctness is communist Propaganda writ small...

"Political Correctness is Tyranny with Manners" -- Charlton Heston

   I have commented many times about political correctness, and the people that believe that they are the purveyor of holiness and their diktats are used to silence the political opposition.   We until Andrew Breitbart came along refused to get into trenches with the leftist, and when he had a "Heart attack" the conservative movement took a loss.  Although I have doubts, I keep wondering if the "Deep State" took him out.

Now we have people like Milo, Ben Shapiro and many others that now will go toe to toe with the leftist and destroy them with logic especially when all the leftist have are "feelings".  I have Blogged Many Times as have my fellow bloggers like oldnfo, Peter, Murphy,Aaron,Irish and many others have commented about the pitfalls of political correctness.  The information is out there but soo many people continue to stick their heads in the sands and ignore the damage to our western based culture.  People try not to be mean to others so they stay silent and give the narrative to the left because many people are now fearing the new "thought Police", if you don't repeat verbatim the new truth or groupthink, you must be hounded and destroyed.

 Theodore Dalrymple
“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”


Saturday, April 4, 2015

Cultural Marxism..or the Political correctness movement.


 One of my favorite actors was Charlton Heston,  he was known for many roles including "The 10 commandments, Ben Hur and many other movies that have become Iconic.  He passed away in 2008 after Alzheimer made an appearance.  He was a one time president of the N.R.A and a spokesman for the 2nd amendment.  he later in life found his values incompatible with the new values in Hollywood.  Charlton was a throwback to an earlier time where an actor had a code of conduct to live by.  He would frequently equate the new political correctness movement as "cultural tyranny" and similar quotes.  I have one of his quotes on the home page of my blog.

"Political Correctness is Tyranny with Manners" -- Charlton Heston




I have always equated the political correctness as cultural Marxism.  If you can get a society to question the things that have held the test of time for generations, then you can substitute a different dogma to fit the political climate of the time.  Once you can  use the innate politeness of a culture to denigrate what you consider thought or speech that is anathema to your belief structure, you have won.  Once people are afraid to speak their mind, you have won.  Once you have people mentally surrender their freedom of thought, you have won.  and this is what the cultural Marxist are after.  it is all thought control, even the private thoughts of a person, you can control that, then you have won... you have effectively squashed all rebellion against your big government agenda.

Dalrymple: Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One's standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.     

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Political corectness and Fort Hood

Let's start by stating the most obvious conclusion to be drawn from the re cent report by Sens. Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins concerning the Fort Hood massacre: Unless we expunge it from our national discourse, political correctness gets Americans killed.
On Nov. 5, 2009, Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, an American citizen, a radicalized Muslim, a psychiatrist and, in the words of the report, "a ticking time bomb," shot up a soldier readiness center on America's largest active-duty Army base, killing 12 military personnel and one civilian, and wounding 32 others. It was a direct assault on the armed forces of the United States by a self-proclaimed "Soldier of Allah" (written on his business cards) who shouted the Muslim incantation Allahu akbar before opening fire.
Lieberman: Zeroes in on Army's blindness to Hasan's radicalism.
Lieberman: Zeroes in on Army's blindness to Hasan's radicalism.
It's hard to imagine a clearer example of the asymmetrical warfare a free and welcoming country fights against cowardly opponents who refuse to abide by the laws of war, but there it was.
In any other war, someone like Maj. Hasan would never have gotten close to the Army, never have been handled with kid gloves, and never been promoted.
What was the Army thinking? That if we could just get our enemies to like us, all this unpleasantness will soon be over?
America bent over backward after 9/11 to assure Muslims that we weren't at war with Islam. Our country offered the hand of friendship to people like Maj. Hasan -- ignoring his radicalism, his praise of suicide bombers, his sympathy for Osama bin Laden and his belief that his religion, as the report notes, "took precedence over the US Constitution he swore to support and defend as a US military officer . . . Hasan's statements about the primacy of religious law occurred as he was supporting a violent extremist interpretation of Islam and suggesting that this radical ideology justified opposition to US policy and could lead to fratricide in the ranks."
He certainly was right about that.
Did anybody, from the fruit-salad brass to our crack intelligence services, do anything about it? Of course not.
Lieberman and Collins put their fingers on the problem: "Despite Hasan's overt displays of radicalization to violent Islamist extremism, Hasan's superiors failed to discipline him, refer him to counterintelligence officials or seek to discharge him. One of the officers who reported Hasan to superiors opined that Hasan was permitted to remain in service because of 'political correctness' and ignorance of religious practices."
It couldn't be much clearer than that.
Since the Clinton administration, the military has been subjected to an unprecedented assault on its core values, its traditions and its honor. It's become a laboratory for social experiment as its desk-jockey officer corps clamber up the greasy pole of promotion -- and, just as in civilian life, getting people like Maj. Hasan promoted in the name of the dubious virtue "diversity" was one such path.
It's time for that to stop. If anybody should be in the business of clear-headed threat analysis, it's the US military. "Political correctness," which literally seeks to make certain speech unthinkable, should have no place in a free society.
On Dec. 8, President Franklin D. Roosevelt addressed a joint session of Congress. We all remember his famous opening: "Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941, a date which will live in infamy . . ." But the words that followed were what rallied Americans:
"As commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense, that always will our whole nation remember the character of the onslaught against us. No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people, in their righteous might, will win through to absolute victory . . . We will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us."
The men and women of our armed forces are fully prepared to die on the battlefield, when we ask them to. What we should never do is ask them to die on the altar of political correctness.

Thursday, May 31, 2012

Politically correct school prom


I saw this on Fox News,    You have got to be fricking kidding me...I read this drivel from the school principal and what a joke.  And at the end of the article she states that " this is a non issue and I have more important job to do"  This is the act of a typical leftist, try to assume the moral high ground so they don"t have to lessen themselves in a debate with their social inferiors.  This is political correctness run amuck.  I have a quote of political correctness on my blog by Charlton Heston" Political correctness is tyranny with manners."   When you have government bureaucrats making arbitrary decisions and they have to answer to nobody for their action..something is wrong with this picture.  This prinicpal is using the classic argument that " it is for the Children" as this is the sole justification for her action...the all knowing liberal that knows what is best for the little people and if we would just do as the liberals say, we would find this utopia that is just over the horizon.   School proms have always been a popularity contest..that is the way it has been.  To have it selected by name out of a box..what a way to generate school pride.  Have a government flunky select the process of the king and queen of a prom.  it is a little thing but it is endemic of the culture wars and the problems that we face.


By Todd Starnes
The principal of a Connecticut high school is defending her decision to end the longtime tradition of allowing students to vote for a prom king and queen over fears that the winners might be bullied.
FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK FOR CULTURE WAR NEWS! CLICK HERE!
But students at Kaynor Tech High School in Waterbury, Conn. have accused Principal Lisa Hylwa of bowing to political correctness.
In the past, the prom court was selected by a student vote. But Hylwa said she wanted to keep drama out of the prom and stop bullying. Instead, students who attended prom were invited to put their names in a box and the court was selected randomly.
“A lot of kids just think it’s unfair because you know, it’s a prom tradition,” student Jennifer Buonocore told television station WTNH. The station reported that it was flooded with comments from students wondering why the tradition was changed.
The principal said that all the students deserve an opportunity to participate as prom king and queen.
“This method gives everyone the same opportunity o be a member of the prom court and it supports the positive spirit of our school, period,” Hylwa wrote in a terse email to Fox News Radio. “There is no hidden agenda with this, no reason for ‘hurt feelings’ or adding another issue on to a teenager’s full plate that could ‘spark’ jealousy, ‘mean behavior’ or bullying.”
The principal said the new way of selecting a prom court “eliminates the avenue for the pressure to vote for members of the clique in charge or for any other issues that could open the door to amplified drama which may lead to any type of ‘mean behavior’ or equity controversy.”
She said the traditional method of voting for prom king and king was “beyond obsolete.”
“There was no option for the student or students who did the most for the class to win or a ‘noble’ reason such as a child who was terminally ill winning the prize,” she wrote. “This was a popularity contest with no criteria. The fact is, there are enough popularity contests in high school so why sponsor another one that may have negative consequences?”
“Cliques are real bullies by the way,” she added.
 Hylwa said she feared a “Carrie” incident at this year’s prom, referring to the 1976 horror film.
“A student did complain on Facebook and to the school staff that she/he could not sleep the night before because she/he feared being bullied by being selected as prom queen,” she wrote. “It was going to be a mean spirited prank. She was not sure.”
“I was not taking a chance,” the principal said. “Sounds like ‘Carrie’ but we can’t brush it aside in today’s atmosphere. Connecticut has the CT Bullying Law and we are not playing in the Nutmeg state.”
But students like Buonocore said there’s no bullying at the prom.
“I don’t feel like anyone in our class would ever do something like that or in the junior class, that’s just mean and we’re not mean,” she told the television station.
But the principal said the new rules won’t be changed.
“I have no more time to waste on this ‘non story’,” she wrote. “I have a serious job to do.”

Wednesday, May 25, 2011







 I got this from The Hill
The Transportation Security Administration is too worried about "political correctness," according to a Republican lawmaker.

Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.), a member of the House Homeland Security Committee, said TSA is too politically correct when it chooses which passengers to search at airport security checkpoints.

During a recent trip, Broun said he saw TSA pat down an elderly person and a child, but not a man he himself deemed suspicious.

"I walked through … right behind me there was a grandmother — little old lady, and she was was patted down," Broun said on C-SPAN's "Washington Journal."

"Right behind her was a little kid who was patted down. And then right behind him was a guy in Arabian dress who just walked right through. Why are we patting down grandma and kids?"

Broun did not specify any other reasons the man looked suspicious other than his dress.

Broun said in the interview that the TSA needs to focus "on those people who want to harm us.

"We have to identify those people — we do that through human intelligence, we do that by trying to get into the inner circle," he said. "Focus upon those individuals, not on the general public. Unfortunately, I think the Department of Homeland Security has been focusing on the general public and have been afraid of political correctness.

"We've got to forget political correctness," Broun continued. "We've got to start focusing on those people who want to harm us as a nation."

Thursday, November 17, 2011

4 Steps in England Soon to be here in America

Got this from JPFO



My ancestry hails from the British Isles. I am one hundred percent Anglo Saxon on both sides of my family. Nearly every Brit I’ve met in my travels was polite (and often wonderfully witty). My father fought side by side with Brits in the Pacific Theater in WWII and his praise for their courage and honor was unbounded. I was raised an Anglophile, a person who truly appreciates the people and culture of Great Britain. However, I haven’t yet visited Great Britain.
And now, by choice, I never will.
Because Great Britain has become the one nation on the entire globe that I hold in irrevocable contempt. Yes, even more than the tyrannies of Iran or Red China or the African despots.
The Iranians, the Chinese, or the Somalis are transparent about what they are: impervious to "democracy" and disinterested in the concepts and responsibilities of personal freedom. They are socially addicted to fanatic religious, tribal, or age-old caste/cultural dictatorship and ruthless strong-arm rule.
In our lifetimes the Iranians, the Chinese, and the Somalis will likely NEVER know personal freedom. It is not in their mentalities, their culture, or within any context of any historical memory that any of them can relate to. Within their nations, they are "immune" to democracy and personal freedom. And so be it, that’s just the way it is.
But my fundamental grudge against England is that Great Britain has willfully chosen a degrading, cowardly, and amoral plummet into self induced slavery and cultural suicide. They have chosen to destroy one of the most productive freedom based cultures of the last five hundred years.
There are four steps that the Brits took toward cultural suicide, and America is not far behind.

THE FOUR STEPS:
#1. Socialism was America’s initial step towards the "English Ideal". Thank the cultural Marxists (it’s their blueprint), Franklin Delano Roosevelt (The New Deal), and Lyndon Baines Johnson (The Great Society).
(An intriguing aside: The "National Firearms Act of 1934 under FDR, and the "Gun Control Act of 1968" under LBJ. Coincidence?)
#2.Multiculturalism (which is far, far different from the Yankee "melting pot" assimilation ideal) is America’s second step towards English Pudding World. Recently, British Prime Minister Cameron declared that multiculturalism had failed. I’ll leave that there. Even that socialist twit can finally see the forest through the trees.
#3. Political correctness is the third step toward British moral and judicial perversity. In England you go to jail for saying critical things about certain races, religions, ethnic groups, or sexual orientations that here in America are still legal, if only barely so. When "hate language" is illegal in America this will no longer be America. Jailing for politically incorrect speech is right at our borders, friends.
#4. Gun control" is the fourth step towards the wondrous "British System". The dependency upon government that began with socialism is now complete: the government will protect you. You don’t need a gun. Surrender your firearms.

Multiculturalism exacerbates tensions among the races and cultures and these tensions breed a tendency toward violence. "You still don’t need a gun." Just let the cops wield even more power over all of us. Give the government even more power over the individual as an excuse to quell "racial tension". So, to instill multicultural peace? Surrender your firearms.
And political correctness shuts us all up. The emperor has no clothes, but we have been so brainwashed and manipulated that none of us dares speak out with the truth. Guns are now bad! Our children are sent to a shrink for drawing a picture of a gun in school. "Conflict resolution" has taken the place of simply beating the daylights out of the bully on the school yard. This nation’s liberals think self defense is barbaric, "macho", and "Neanderthal". Surrender your firearms.
Now, look closely at this photo: *
This is the end game of "gun control". An innocent man is attacked and has no means of self-protection. This pitiful photograph was taken during the recent London riots. It says it all. This is the final fetid result of the Nanny State that is now Great Britain.
Do you think this event could ever happen in a "Constitutional Carry" state like Alaska, Vermont, Wyoming, or Arizona? Would this be even remotely possible if the thief understood that a robbery using deadly force could be met by the chance that this smaller, weaker fellow, might be packing a Glock? Don’t give me any cultural relativity blather regarding "oppression" and "pent up rage" or any of the other politically correct regurgitation used by the talking heads to excuse the rioting in London.
Just answer the question: Could this happen in Arizona, Wyoming, Vermont, or Alaska?
Could this happen in a state known for a high density of licensed concealed carry? Don’t prevaricate with any "well … that depends" and other such bilge. Yes or no?
The British have been turned into insipid weaklings. From "the sun never sets on the British Empire" to pulling down one’s pants on demand. This is sickening and disgusting.
Additionally, we should feel a deep empathy for the millions of still proud Brits who must realize that their chance to turn any of this around is over. They have been effectively disarmed. There is now NOTHING dissenting Englishmen and women can do. They are helpless.
So every time you hear some American advocate for socialism, multiculturalism, political correctness, or "gun control" spouting off, bring the pathetic image of this photograph to mind.
This is where America is heading. Anyone who denies it is either a fool or a liar. Thank you, Great Britain, for providing a warning about what’s to come.
* A thug demands the clothes and shoes from a hapless victim, during the 2011 London riots.

Friday, July 28, 2017

Boy Scout Issues...and the Trump Speech

Today on the way home, I gotten a messenger from the Diva of hotness, my favorite Blog Babe sent me a messenger with these articles attached to it and she had asked my opinion.  The first one was an apology from Boy Scouts of America apologizing for President Trump's speech, the second thing was an opinion piece from a commenter at FoxNews.  

July 27, 2017
Scouting Family,
In the last two weeks, we have celebrated the best of Scouting at our 20th National Jamboree with nearly 40,000 participants, volunteers, staff and visitors. The 2017 National Jamboree has showcased and furthered the Scouting mission by combining adventure and leadership development to give youth life-changing experiences. Scouts from Alaska met Scouts from Alabama; Scouts from New Mexico met those from New York, and American youth met youth from 59 other countries.
Over the course of ten days, Scouts have taken part in adventures, learned new skills, made new and lasting friendships and completed over 200 community service projects that offered 100,000 hours of service to the community by young men and women eager to do the right thing for the right reasons.
These character-building experiences have not diminished in recent days at the jamboree –  Scouts have continued to trade patches, climb rock walls, and share stories about the day’s adventures. But for our Scouting family at home not able to see these real moments of Scouting, we know the past few days have been overshadowed by the remarks offered by the President of the United States.
I want to extend my sincere apologies to those in our Scouting family who were offended by the political rhetoric that was inserted into the jamboree. That was never our intent. The invitation for the sitting U.S. President to visit the National Jamboree is a long-standing tradition that has been extended to the leader of our nation that has had a Jamboree during his term since 1937. It is in no way an endorsement of any person, party or policies. For years, people have called upon us to take a position on political issues, and we have steadfastly remained non-partisan and refused to comment on political matters. We sincerely regret that politics were inserted into the Scouting program.
While we live in a challenging time in a country divided along political lines, the focus of Scouting remains the same today as every day.
Trustworthiness, loyalty, kindness and bravery are just a few of the admirable traits Scouts aspire to develop – in fact, they make up the Scout Oath and Scout Law.
As part of our program’s duty to country, we teach youth to become active citizens, to participate in their government, respect the variety of perspectives and to stand up for individual rights.
Few will argue the importance of teaching values and responsibility to our youth — not only right from wrong, but specific positive values such as fairness, courage, honor and respect for others.
For all of the adventure we provide youth such as hiking, camping and zip-lining, those activities actually serve as proven pathways and opportunities to develop leadership skills and become people of character.
In a time when differences seem to separate our country, we hope the true spirit of Scouting will empower our next generation of leaders to bring people together to do good in the world.
Yours in Scouting,
Mike

Now I read this article.....

The time has come for every red-blooded, God-loving patriot to sever ties with the Boy Scouts of America.
On Thursday the Boy Scouts (and those who identify as Boy Scouts) took it upon themselves to apologize for President Trump’s speech delivered to some 40,000 people at the National Scout Jamboree.
In doing so the leadership of the BSA has brought shame and disgrace upon what was once a storied and revered organization.
“I want to extend my sincere apologies to those in our Scouting family who were offended by the political rhetoric that was inserted into the jamboree. That was never our intent,” BSA Chief Scout Executive Michael Surbaugh wrote.
He went on to say the BSA regrets “that politics were inserted in the Scouting program.”  You can read his entire screed by clicking here. 
Who – exactly – was offended by the president’s remarks?
He was greeted with a tremendous welcome – thunderous applause and cheers. Thousands of scouts chanted his name. If there were those who took offense, their numbers were considerably small.
Quite frankly, I contend the only people truly offended by the president’s remarks were liberals, the Mainstream Media, Hollywood starlets and BSA leadership. And I suspect they were more offended that Trump’s name elicited cheers while former President Obama’s name elicited jeers – with great gusto.
Surbaugh went on to write in a lengthy blog posting that the Boy scouts have “steadfastly remained non-partisan and refused to comment on political matters.”
That is a patently false statement.
The adult leadership of the BSA has allowed the organization to become a playground for the gender and sex revolutionaries. In January, the BSA sacrificed its last vestige of integrity on the altar of political correctness by allowing girls who identify as boys to join scout troops.
And where was the BSA leadership when the Mainstream Media compared the president’s speech to a Hitler Nazi Youth speech?
So spare us the righteous indignation, Mr. Surbaugh.
I would urge every parent with a child in the Boy Scouts to consider an alternative scouting organization – Trail Life USA. Trail Life is a faith-based scouting program that stands on a firm foundation.  
There was a time when the Boy Scouts of America taught young boys and young men to make moral and ethical decisions. But those days are long gone.

 Now I will give my opinion, the Boy Scouts are wrapped in the culture war, the BSA tries to remain non partisan, but the Left views the Boy Scouts as "traditional American values" and like all Marxist, they strive to wipe out the collective history of a people to insert their own values.  The Boy scouts are collateral damage in a culture war that has seen a lot of changes and not all of it good.  The Left has a "Take No Prisoners" attitude and the right tries to "get along" and make compromises to appease the left, but the left is never satisfied.  The goal of the left is to totally remake America in their own twisted image that bore little resemblance to the America that did exist at one time.  If a people don't know their traditions and past, they are easier to manipulate and control and to the left, it all boils down to control.  They know what is best for for the rest of us, and if we would only get with the program the great utopia will arrive.
     Now to the letter from the Scout Executive.  He should not have apologized, I am sure that the corporate donors put pressure on him because the left is big on organizing and boycotting and controlling the outrage machine.  Now that they apologized, the left smells blood in the water, now the BSA will have to do something to "atone" for the great sin and deviating from leftist cultural dogma.  Like I said, the Chief Executive should not have apologized, he needs to realize that to the left, there is no "non partisan", if you ain't with their agenda, then you are to be crushed or forced to heel and toe the line.   The Boy Scouts will have to start developing a backbone, if they espouse traditional values than they need to stand by the traditional or timeless values, then they need to develop a spine and realize that they cannot appease the militant left.  Many people put their kids in the Boy Scouts so they learn traditional or timeless values that have stood the test of time.  Values that have been generational are in danger of being wiped out in the name of political correctness and 
being eradicated on the alter of cultural Marxism. 

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

homophobia versus islamaphobia..which is the dominant P.C

This article from The Gates of Vienna, and it cuts to the heart of so much of the issue. How leftism, and political correctness really are snakes that eat their own tails. People call Geert Wilders, “Far right wing” attempting to link him to Nazis and racists as popular myth makes them right wing somehow. But Geert has been vocally defending the rights of people like the ones in the article below, as well as many other minority groups who, up until the ascendancy of Islam in the Netherlands, nearly defined Dutch liberalism and now are in full retreat in some areas.
Eeyore for Vlad
The Netherlands has long been in the forefront of tolerance and support for the rights of gay people. With its institution of homosexual marriage and widespread public disapproval of gay-hatred, the Dutch have led the way for the rest of Western culture.
In recent years the cultural enrichment of major Dutch cities has caused an upsurge of violence against gays by Muslim immigrants. This trend — which has become too large to ignore completely — highlights one of the major contradictions of politically correct Multiculturalism.
According to Multiculturalism, the culture of “brown people” is above criticism. Any negative observation about their behavior is evidence of “xenophobia”, and also “Islamophobia” if they are Muslims.
According to Political Correctness, any hostility towards gays is evidence of “homophobia”.
So what happens when Muslims attack gays? Which doctrine holds the trump card?
Well, we all know the answer to that one by now — tolerance of Islam trumps everything else. Gay rights, women’s rights, children’s rights, the rights of Jews or Hindus — all are cast aside when they come into conflict with the accommodation of Islam.
Because of the cognitive dissonance induced by this contradiction, the issue of Muslim gay-hatred is generally ignored in the media. Stories of Muslim violence against homosexuals are excluded, or disguised by omitting a full description of the perpetrators. The problem is swept under the rug as much as possible.
Sometimes, however, the incidents become to egregious or too numerous to avoid, and pop up in the press. One such story was published today by :NIS News
Harassed Gay Couple Taking Police to Court
Utrecht — A homosexual couple is demanding damages from the government because the police allegedly refused to take action against Moroccan youths who systematically threatened them.
The men suffered multiple harassments. For example, their car windows were broken, ‘homo’ was scratched on the car and a brick and fireworks were thrown at their window. The couple made a police report for all these matters, but the police never took any action, says their lawyer Yehudi Moszkowicz.

Tuesday, December 2, 2014

Islam don't have a sense of humor....

   I have on my blog a quote from Charleton Heston that stated that "Political Correctness is Tyranny with manners".  I havn't made any comment about Islam lately...they call Islam the Religion of Peace...There is a piece of you here and a piece of you there......   Anyway, It is very condescending to treat people this way..if you can't laugh, you are too uptight.  The people that bash Islam are pilloried, threathened with a Fatwa and other items from having the department of justice investigate you if you say something that isn't complementary to Islam.  Here in America, we are supposed to be open to all religions, and all can practice here. but certain religions are elevated, the unofficial religion for the United States is Islam.  That religion has special protections under the law that all others don't have.   But Because radical Islam is not compatible with free, Western societies, the followers of that faith take joking very seriously. Their prophet can’t be depicted in cartoons and liberals who applaud Christian-bashing “art” are never brave enough to mock Islam.
 There was an English writer that had commented one time that a good test of a good religion was if you could make jokes about it.  Mr Chesterton made that quote a while back.  Mr Cleese who is famous for his roles with Monty Python and other roles made a comment.


For something completely different, watch (above) as Cleese discusses political correctness with Bill Maher. When Maher noted that Islam is a religion that you can’t joke about in public, John Cleese replied that you CAN but

It just means that they’ll kill you. Theoretically you could.
And,
The problem is if you make jokes about people who are going to kill you, there is a sort of tendency to hold back a little, isn’t there?
The cartoon that a few years ago got a "fatwa" against the artist for "insulting Islam
 
.

Thursday, September 21, 2017

Dereliction of Duty to the Military forces in the name of Political Correctness


I was reading from David Hackworth blog, here is a quick bio of Hack, David Haskell Hackworth (November 11, 1930 – May 4, 2005), also known as "Hack," was a prominent military journalist and a former United States Army colonel who was decorated in both the Korean War and Vietnam War. Hackworth is known for his role in the creation and command of Tiger Force, a military unit which was formed in South Vietnam to apply guerrilla warfare tactics against Viet Cong guerrilla fighters.
     You can read the rest of his bio on Wiki Here.

      I didn't agree with everything that Hack espoused especially the anti-nuclear stuff, he believed that we should disarm and the Soviet Union get a pass and I personally disagreed with him.  But the guy was a warrior, somebody that wins 10 silver stars for valor plus a myriad of other awards is worthy of respect.  He was always in the warfighters corner, and he had distain for the "perfumed Princes" that were more interested in their careers rather than taking care of the troops.   He was especially critical of Bill Clinton and his pushing a feminist agenda on the U.S Military to eradicate the last vestiges of testosterone in the American Society.  This comment was taken off his blog by the guy that updated the original. 

Original title - Dereliction of Duty – The Feather Merchants, Duds and Perfumed Princes that Sold out the US Military to Political Correctness
Dereliction of duty is a specific offense under United States Code Title 10, Section 892, Article 92 and applies to all branches of the US military. A service member who is derelict has willfully refused to perform his duties (or follow a given order) or has incapacitated himself in such a way that he cannot perform his duties. Article 92 also applies to service members whose acts or omissions rise to the level of criminally negligent behavior.
The US military is in Deep Kimchi. The US military is a non-military, military in 2017.
Since late 1991, the military has been attacked by leftists and militant feminists who were determined to transform the last bastion of masculinity in American society. With the help of traitorous enablers in the military and civilian government officials, their efforts have been more successful than their wildest dreams.
A Maoist cultural revolution has slowly engulfed the military, with the results that today’s US armed forces are totally feminized, led by perfumed princes, focused on things that have nothing to do with war fighting and in many regards, ill-prepared for combat on the high seas, on land and in the air.
The US military in 2017 is being largely run by senior leaders who believe the military is no different than a corporation, except the military has cool uniforms and high explosives. Hollywood values are now the norm and the spirit of the bayonet is no longer, kill, kill, kill; but, diversity.
Sure, we have cool technology, predator drones and nukes. Yes, the SEALs, when they’re not selling juicers or video games, are still eating glass and urinating napalm. Yes, there are still motivated troopers, and good NCO’s; but as a composite, competent, effective and lethal instrument of death to our enemies, the military is a shadow of its former greatness during the Cold War and in Desert Storm. This is not the military that Tom Clancy idolized and wrote about. It’s the military Claudia Kennedy and Patricia Schroeder wanted…and got.
In the last few years, the list of politically correct and socially engineered lunacy in the military seems like something out of a science fiction movie.
The nation has watched as male US Army ROTC cadets were ordered to parade around in red high heels to show their empathy towards rape victims. Soldiers from the Big Red One, the 1st Infantry Division, a unit that landed, fought and died on Omaha Beach (in addition to every other war in the 20th and 21st Century) were ordered to conduct physical training in pregnancy simulators to make men understand how difficult it is to exercise while pregnant. US service personnel were ordered to take white privilege classes, and training which instructed them that the Bible and the Constitution are sexist documents. The Secretary of the Army distributed a memorandum for record to worldwide commands, which instructed commanders to ‘balance lactation support and readiness.’ At Fort Benning, a conspiracy as grand as the Kennedy assassination ensured that three women, including a 37 year old mommy, graduated from Ranger School, a move which gave Secretary of Defense Ash Carter, the green light to authorize women to serve in the combat arms and special operations units. To brainwash an entire generation of young marines, so called ‘unconscious bias training’ is conducted at marine bases to try and convince young men that Mary Jane can hack it in combat with the Old Breed on Peleliu and Okinawa.
At the US Air Force Academy, a lesbian serves as the commandant of cadets. While a lesbian unfurls the colors in Colorado Spring, a veteran combat pilot and Air Force Major General is thrown out of the service for telling a subordinate that he was ‘drunker than 10,000 Indians.’
In the Navy, 16 out of every 100 females are medically evacuated from ships because of pregnancies. In fact, a baby was born on board the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower last September. The Navy smoke and mirrors unit went into action immediately. The idea of a baby being born on a US ship of war was looked at as something normal and the Navy even said they were happy to welcome a new member of the Navy family.
Good God. Raymond Spruance is rolling in his grave.
Meanwhile, the 7th Fleet is still reeling from the Fat Leonard Scandal and is having problems navigating at sea. Collisions in the last year have cost the lives of 17 sailors. In the 5th Fleet last year, a young navy officer willingly surrendered his crews and craft to outgunned Iranian thugs. When in captivity, the young officer continued to violate every tenet of the Code of Conduct, by thanking the Iranians for their hospitality, while one of his men weeped openly on camera like a guest on Oprah.
In the army, senior leaders, realizing that they have no armored or mechanized skills left in the force are desperately trying to turn the army of none overnight into the army that won the Cold War and Desert Storm. Good luck.
Meanwhile, Kim Jong-un seems to have figured out that our missile defense might just very well be full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.
How did all this happen and who’s responsible?
The demise of the US military essentially started the day the Gulf War ended. The war, which had all the nastiness of war from the past, was seen by the public as a video game, where the enemy just laid down their arms and surrendered en masse. War was now clean and bloodless. Sergeant Stryker was no longer needed to storm the ash laden hills of Iwo Jima. Suzie Q could kill the enemy at stand-off ranges by merely pushing buttons.
And, so the feminist fantasies, the PC madness and the social engineering insanity commenced.
Then there was Tailhook…
The Tailhook Affair took place in September of 1991, when Navy and Marine Corps aviators at the yearly convention in Las Vegas were accused of drinking and lewd behavior. Feminists in Congress and in the Beltway saw their moment to wreak havoc on the military’s masculine culture. Tailhook became a feminist slaughterhouse, where hundreds of seasoned and exceptional US Navy and Marine Corps officers, including Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Frank Kelso, were keel-hauled by the Navy for drinking, carousing, indecent conduct and drummed up charges of sexual assault. Imagine that, aviators who drink and get laid; can’t have that in the military.
In a 1992 Newsweek article on Tailhook, the writer states, “It won’t be easy changing the macho atmosphere of the Navy, which has lagged behind the other services in addressing sexual harassment.”
God knows we wouldn’t want macho military people in the military; the hell with Sergeant York and Chris Kyle. Send in Nathan Lane and Liberace…
Actually, it was pretty easy to change the macho environment of the Navy. All you had to do was s-can all the warriors and gradually fill the ranks with powder puff leaders who are PC wallflowers; the result, a surface navy that can’t sail from one end of the lagoon on Gilligan’s Island to the other.
The following is a list of some of those responsible for the current state of the military. There are many others, hundreds; the criminally negligent feather merchants, duds and perfumed princes who sold out the military to political correctness and the let the armed forces be socially engineered into the fiasco we have today:
The Tailhook witch hunt was conducted by Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Barbara S. Pope, who, along with Congresswoman Patricia Schroeder are the first villains in the death of the US military. Pope chaired an ad hoc committee that not only reexamined the roles of women in the military, but put political pressure on President Bill Clinton to make drastic changes in US military policy, which included assigning women as combat pilots in the US military and allowing women to serve on Navy ships, two actions which contributed to the lack of readiness and the lack of fighting spirit we see in the Air Force and Navy today. Schroeder had been a left wing lunatic and advocate of women in combat for years while serving in Congress. Of course, she, like Pope had actually never been within ten thousand miles of a combat zone.
The liberal and feminist militants in the Pentagon and in the Beltway had an ally in the Great Draft Dodger, President Bill Clinton, who saw the military as a great place to conduct social experiments.
In 1994, women were also authorized to serve in support units in the army that they had traditionally been banned from because the units supported the combat arms. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General John Shalikashvili, looked on and said nothing.
During the 1990’s Lieutenant General Claudia Kennedy, was a vocal advocate for women to serve in combat positions in the army, although she herself had never been near any shot and shell. Kennedy’s most famous quote and one which still reverberates through the tattered army today was ‘this is not your father’s army.’
No, it sure as hell isn’t and that’s a big, big problem.
Before out-processing from the lean green machine in 2000, Kennedy accused a fellow general officer of sexual harassment. After all, she’s a feminist. She currently serves as chairwoman of the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services and is a menace to the military.
Nine years after Tailhook and an onslaught of feminist led policies had already shot holes in the military, my old boss at Soldiers for the Truth, the late Colonel David Hackworth, wrote about the ridiculous coddling of young army recruits at Fort Jackson in a 2000 article titled, ‘The March of the Porcelain Soldiers.’ Hack had travelled to ‘Relaxin’ Jackson himself and saw the effects of nine years of the post Desert Storm army. He wasn’t impressed.
In 2001, with a conservative back in the White House, you would have thought that things might revert back to pre-1991 days. Vice President Dick Cheney, who had served as Secretary of Defense knew the score. He had read the reports indicating how poorly coed units in Desert Storm had performed compared to the rock ‘em, sock ‘em all male combat arms units that won the war in 100 hours.
During the Iraq War, to propagate the fantasy of women fighting in combat, the Jessica Lynch fairy tale was written by feminists in the Pentagon. Lynch’s convoy was ambushed in Iraq in 2003. The feminist propaganda machine went into full swing. She was reportedly fighting like John Wayne, Nick Rowe and Henry V combined as she killed multiple enemy soldiers. She was awarded the Bronze Star and her rescue from the hospital was practically directed by Ridley Scott. In actuality, when the ambush started, Lynch was unable to chamber her M-16 because it was dirty. Her vehicle soon crashed, knocking her out. Subsequently, she was taken prisoner and treated in an Iraqi hospital that was largely empty when Lynch was rescued. She will go down in history as the only US soldier to received a Bronze Star for getting cold cocked.
Jessica Lynch will be the first person to tell you she was completely used by perfumed princesses in the Pentagon.
As the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan raged, nothing was done to change anything that had taken place in the Pentagon during the Clinton years.
The die was cast…
The election of President Barack Obama in 2008, would ignite leftists and feminists in the Pentagon, in Congress and in the Beltway to finish a job they had started in 1991. Obama’s mission was to not only fundamentally change America into a socialist country, but to turn the military into a Bob Fosse musical with C4.
No one was more responsible for allowing the military to be destroyed during the Obama years more than General Martin Dempsey. Dempsey, who was referred to as ‘an echo chamber of the Obama administration’, was the virtual captain of the Pentagon Titanic, who stood on the bridge calmly as the US military sank into the Potomac. Under Dempsey’s watch, open homosexuality was authorized, rules of engagement that got troops killed in Afghanistan continued, along with the myriad of absurd sensitivity and diversity training, the collapse of the army’s armor and mechanized capabilities, while the Obama administration shifted money and focus away from missile defense as Dempsey said nothing.
One of those responsible for the abysmal state of the US Navy now is former Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus, who was THE WORST SECRETARY OF THE NAVY IN US HISTORY. Mabus was a one man social engineering wrecking ball. During his tenure, the Navy lost ships and quality leaders while the Marine Corps received a new Orwellian gender neutral dictionary and Soviet style ‘unconsious bias training.’ In an OPED to the Washington Post, Mabus wrote that he believed women should serve in combat because he once watched four female marines negotiate a six foot wall.
Obama’s willing executioner to implement every single PC directive was none other than Secretary of Defense Ash Carter. Carter opened all combat positions in the US military to women in 2016, and with the help of Ray Mabus, completely ignored the Marines’ 36 million dollar study which said in no uncertain terms that all male units perform much better in combat simulated situations than all female and coed units.
After Dempsey escaped from the Pentagon Titanic in a lifeboat down the Potomac, he was replaced by General ‘Fighting Joe’ Dunford, who is clearly against women serving in combat, but never said so publicly, or resigned his commission in protest. Dunford’s silence helped no one except Dunford and his pension.
In the summer of 2015, the former Secretary of the Army, John McHugh conspired with Major General Scott Miller, the commander of Fort Benning, to graduate several women from Ranger School. McHugh ignored repeated attempts from Congressman Steve Russell to present school records for the three women who were passed through at Fort Benning. Major General Scott Miller, a former member of Delta Force and a veteran of combat in Mogandishu, sold his soul to political correctness by ensuring that there were female graduates from the army’s toughest training. Stories of special coddling for the women, including showers, special diets, unlimited attempts to pass the course and pre, pre Ranger training held at Fort Carson, led many to believe that something was indeed rotten at Fort Benning; along with the fact that the three female graduates looked very plump on graduation day, when most men lose 40 to 60 pounds. To this day, Congressman Russell has never seen the green cards (Ranger School transcripts) for the three women.
In Congress, Congresswoman Marth McSally, a former A-10 pilot and a feminist Kool Aid consumer, has been a strong supporter of women to serve in ground combat units and MOS’ even though she has never experienced ground combat herself.
Others members of Congress that are vocal and obnoxious supporters for women to serve in combat, but who know nothing of combat, or the military in general are Congresswoman Kristen Gillibrand and Senator Claire McCaskill.
Then there’s General Mattis…
Mattis has largely been all talk and very little action. He has done nothing to reverse any of the Obama era directives except for the transgender issue, in which he was ordered to by the President.
The jury is still out on General Mattis.
Those mentioned, as said, are only a smattering of the hundreds of self-serving military bureaucrats and politicians who sold out the armed forces because they were more concerned about their pensions, PX benefits, Tricare and post career salaries than about the soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen and women.
Anyone who has served, particularly in the army or marines, knows the phrase, ‘The Mission and the Men; first the military’s main mission – to train for war, to be prepared for war and to win those wars. Second, the men and the women that serve in the military need to know that their leaders and particularly those at the top are making decisions that will ensure that they have the best chance to survive training, and more importantly combat. Our senior leaders are most importantly in charge of people’s lives. Their actions affect whether your son or daughter comes home in a box or not.
Frankly, it’s more than obvious that a majority of the nation’s senior military leaders, senior defined as anyone wearing a star, haven’t given a damn about the troops for a long time. It’s been all about soothing feminist fantasies, placating some idiot in Congress who doesn’t know a FROG-7 from a F-14 and following along with social engineering that any fool with half a brain knows is plain old insanity.
Should these people be prosecuted for criminal negligence, aka, dereliction of duty? Can they be? Through their actions, for whatever motivation, they have put not only the lives of US military personnel in danger, but the nation itself.

Monday, April 22, 2013

Monday Music, Boston Bombers....and cub scouting...:) The good, the really bad..and really good.

I have been busy with work and cub scouts, My son and I went to the U.S.S. Yorktown to "camp out" on a real aircraft carrier.  This from Wiki:"
USS Yorktown (CV/CVA/CVS-10) is one of 24 Essex-class aircraft carriers built during World War II for the United States Navy. She is named after the Battle of Yorktown of the American Revolutionary War, and is the fourth U.S. Navy ship to bear the name. Initially to have been named Bon Homme Richard, she was renamed Yorktown while under construction to commemorate USS Yorktown (CV-5), lost at the Battle of Midway in June 1942. Yorktown was commissioned in April 1943, and participated in several campaigns in the Pacific Theater of Operations, earning 11 battle stars and the Presidential Unit Citation.
Decommissioned shortly after the end of the war, she was modernized and recommissioned in the early 1950s as an attack carrier (CVA), and then eventually became an antisubmarine carrier (CVS). She was recommissioned too late to participate in the Korean War but served for many years in the Pacific, including duty in the Vietnam War, in which she earned five battle stars. Late in her career she served as a recovery ship for the Apollo 8 space mission, was used in the movie Tora! Tora! Tora! which recreated the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and in the science fiction film The Philadelphia Experiment.
Yorktown was decommissioned in 1970 and in 1975 became a museum ship at Patriot's Point, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina. She is a National Historic Landmark."


We also took a shuttle boat to the Fort Sumter National park, the place where the War against Yankee aggression started, er the war between the states, er..the Civil War started.  The trip is also a worthwhile trip.  You can see how strategic the location was.  They upgraded the fort after the war, and installed some of the disappearing rifles as part of coastal defence back in the day before the advent of airplanes and missiles made such defences obsolete. 


   Now a bit about the Boston Bomber..you know the jerks that paralized a city for 2 days and had people hiding in their house, I cribbed this from Boortz:

"The people directly responsible for the bombings in Boston are either dead, in the case of the older bomber, or shot all to hell and in custody, in the case of the younger bomber.  (I don’t particularly like giving these people the publicity they want by naming them).  So, is it over?  With the death of one, and the arrest of the other brother, is this case pretty much closed?  If they acted alone and absent outside coaching or influence, yes.  If not … no.  It is most certainly not over.
So there we have the Mayor of Boston yesterday telling America that these two bombers acted alone.  That’s it.  It’s over.  We killed on, the other is in custody.  Case closed.  Nobody else was involved  We have them, and there’s nothing  more to see here.
Here’s an oddity for you to consider.  When there is a violent incident; a mass shooting, a bombing, a political assassination; the media seems to be instantly posed to blame it on right wingers.  This happened all the way back with the assassination of John F. Kennedy. I lived in Texas at the time, and immediately the national media was blaming right wing elements for Kennedy’s death.  In some areas of the country offices of right wing organizations such as The John Birch Society were being vandalized.  In California cars with Texas license plates were being vandalized as well.  Then … well what do you know? … the assassin turned out to be a communist?  Don’t you just hate it when that happens?
  • The man show shot Congresswoman Gabby Giffords and killed several people?  That was Sarah Palin’s fault, you know.   In no time at all DailyKos and Think Progress, left wing websites, were blaming this on Palin because she posted a map “targeting” certain congressmen for defeat in the upcoming election.  It was shown that the “targets” she used on that map were really surveyors marks obtained from the Internet – marks used to indicate geographic locations, like congressional districts – but to the left they were telescopic sights – Palin’s message that these people needed to be shot.  The shooter turned out to be a complete lunatic with no discernable political leanings.
  • The man who killed those folks in the Aurora, Colorado theater?  In no time at all he was identified as a Tea Party member because Brian Ross at ABC, operating under an assumption that the shooter simply must be a conservative, found a Colorado Tea Party member with the same (quite common) name.
            This is common behavior for the left and the 0bamaMedia.  There’s been an act of violence.  Blame the right.  After the Boston bombings CNN’s Wolf Blitzer was saying that due to the fact it was Patriot’s Day, and Tax Day, perhaps anti-government right wing groups are to blame.  Looney old Chris Matthews was also blaming the right, saying that normally domestic terrorism comes from the right.  We had a Salon Magazine columnist begging for the bombes to be white males.   CNN had a so-called counter-terrorism expert on the air who said that pressure cooker bombs were a signature of the right wing, though there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for that statement.  MSNBC puts a Harvard Professor on the air to suggest that the “far right” might be responsible.  An NPR “journalist” said that the attack could have been right-wingers celebrating Columbine or Hitler’s birthday.  Can you believe this stuff?  Well, believe it.  It’s the normal course of conduct after an incident such as this … right up until the time when it’s discovered that the perps aren’t right-wingers, as is normally the case.
So then did you see the Mayor of Boston yesterday?  After the identity and political and religious leanings fo the bombers became known the whole incident suddenly morphed from being caused by some evil right-wing political movement to two men out on their own..Sure enough the Boston mayor, a Democrat (of course) was telling America that the bombers acted alone.  It was just them.  Case pretty much closed.
     The needs of political correctness dictate the “acted alone” conclusion.  If government, particularly the Feds and Homeland Security, do not use the “acted alone” approach then the follow-up question will naturally be: “Well, what are you doing to find out who was involved with the bombers?  Who influenced them?  What happened on that trip to Russia?  What about the Mosques the brothers attended?  Are there other known radicals involved with that Mosque?  Have known radicals who could have had influence on the members visited Mosque?   You cannot address these questions without focusing on Muslims – on the wonderful, serene, peaceful, loving religion of Islam.  And of course as soon as you start focusing on Muslims, on Mosques, and on the associates of the two bombing brothers --- you’re then engaging in the hideous, horrible practice of profiling!  OMG!  It might even be racial profiling!  After all, the vast majority of Muslim radicals are from the Middle East!
Of course as long as you think that right wing militias committed some heinous act, or the Tea (Taxed Enough Already) Party or white supremacists – you can blame groups and movements and investigate to your heart’s content.  After all … these people are perceived as predominantly white, and to make things worse, they’re largely believed to be white (ugh) males!  But if a protected religious or racial minority might have been involved … be careful!  You don’t want to profile!"

    This is also an installment of my Monday Music, I am going to pull this from the "Born in the U.S.A." album from Bruce Springstein.  I don't like his politics but his older albums are good where they spoke from the blue collar workers point of view.  This song is "I'm on fire"  it is a short song and a real cool video with a 57 T-bird.
                                              
I'm on Fire" was recorded in February 1982 during the first wave of Born in the U.S.A. sessions. This took place in impromptu fashion when Springsteen started making up a slow tune on guitar for some lyrics he had, some of which had been written for Spanish Eyes, which would later surface on The Promise, and drummer Max Weinberg and keyboardist Roy Bittan, hearing it for the first time, created an accompaniment on the spot. The result was a moody number that merges a soft rockabilly beat, lyrics built around sexual tension, and synthesizers into an effective whole; it was one of the first uses of that instrument in Springsteen's music.
The song peaked at #6 on the Billboard Hot 100 pop singles charts in early 1985. It was the fourth of a record-tying seven Top 10 hit singles to be released from Born in the U.S.A. It is also remarkable that the single reached #1 in the Netherlands for 3 weeks in August 1985, at the same time as 2 other Springsteen singles ("Dancing in the Dark" and "Born in the U.S.A.") were occupying the Top 12.
Unlike the first three singles from the album, no remixes were made for "I'm on Fire" (nor were any made for any of the subsequent singles released).

The music video for the song was shot in March 1985 in Los Angeles, and was directed by filmmaker John Sayles. Unlike the previous videos from the album, this video was not a performance clip but rather portrayed a dramatic storyline that alluded to some of the song's emotions.
In it, Springsteen plays a working class automobile mechanic with an attractive, married, very well-to-do, mostly unseen female customer who brings her vintage Ford Thunderbird in for frequent servicing, always requesting that he does the work. She leaves a small bunch of keys with him when she leaves in her car, possibly including house keys, but declines his offer to bring the car out to her house when it's ready. Later that night, he drives the car up to her mansion high in the hills above the city. He looks to a second floor window with the light on and is about to ring the bell, when he thinks better of it and drops her keys in the mailbox next to the door. He smiles wistfully and walks away down towards the city lights below.[4]
The video began airing in mid-April, received extensive MTV airplay, and later in the year won the MTV Video Music Award for Best Male Video.

Thursday, June 16, 2016

Riding the Trump Train?

 I support Trump but I do have misgivings, I am not firmly on the Trump train, I understand why people are riding it.  I see on many FB feeds that people are seeing Trump to fix all the countries ills.  I am not sure any one man can do that.  The country ills are many and varied caused by many things and I don't know if one person can do it especially with the massive pushback that he will receive from both team Donk and the establishment GOP.


I clipped this from Here
I’m not a wishy-washy or indecisive person but jumping aboard the Trump Train has, at times, felt more like riding an emotional roller coaster than an iron horse. One day I’m the person talking others into voting for Donald Trump and then, just when I’m ready to throw my full weight behind him, he’ll say something or I’ll read an article or have a conversation with someone, and I start second-guessing myself.
I am not alone. Millions of conservatives, who supported candidates other than Donald Trump but are committed to vote for the Republican nominee, suffer from this affliction. We understand what Trump is doing and what his appeal is -- and we wholeheartedly concur. But, we question his devotion to conservative principles and have concerns about how he will govern. We want to stand by our conservative convictions but we also want to be pragmatic. We aren’t #nevertrumpers. We will vote for Anyone But Hillary. We do not want to stay home on Election Day. We do not want a third-party candidate -- and we certainly don’t want to vote for Gary Johnson. We do not want this vote to go to the House. We do not want to do anything to hand a victory to Clinton. We want to vote for the most conservative candidate who can win -- and that clearly is Trump -- but we don’t want it on our shoulders if he turns out to be a dud.
The schemes of the #nevertrumpers do not appeal to us nor are they viable. Their never-ending quest for a better, more palatable candidate is at best a pipe dream. Their insistence that Trump will ruin the country, fails to acknowledge that that country is already long gone, has been decimated by eight years of Obama, and will never recover from a Hillary presidency. Their concern that Trump would usher in the death of the GOP is blind to the fact that the GOP is already in a death spiral. And their fantasies about some kind of spoiler candidate who would throw the vote to the House, is guaranteed to sound the death knell for the GOP and ensure that the 2018 elections are a bloodbath.
Even worse, they have put their playground politics ahead of national security by refusing to join forces with the one candidate who isn’t afraid to say Islamic. Radical. Jihad. If they truly believe that a Clinton back in the Oval Office, a Democrat-controlled Congress, and a Supreme Court stocked with young, healthy progressives will teach the rest of the GOP a lesson, then they should just buy a pitcher of Kool-Aid pitcher and get it over with: they are not Republicans or conservatives.
There was a time when we might have been somewhat sympathetic to some of the concerns expressed by the #nevertrumpers, but their relentless, tone deaf pushback has only served to antagonize, and drive us further into the embrace of Trump. A few examples will illustrate.
When Paul Ryan hemorrhages about Trump not being P.C., he sends a message to the millions backing Trump because of his anti-PC approach, that he really doesn’t have our six. Not only is Ryan doing the unthinkable and downright treasonous -- siding with the Democrat-Media Complex -- but he has become a general in the P.C. Army, wielding his cudgel of political correctness against…his own kin.
Then there is Romney, the Pusillanimous. After repeatedly failing to fight back about his wealth, women in binders, the 47%, and Obama’s lies about Benghazi, it turns out he’s more Romney, the Raging Pugilist -- only he’s throwing punches at the wrong guy. Add to that his comments about “trickle-down racism” and we are left with a man who has little regard for the people, doesn’t believe we can think for ourselves, and openly maligns Trump and his supporters as racists. With friends like that who needs Democrats.
While an entire cadre of writers at National Review fits the bill, Jay Nordlinger is this week’s stand out: he’s leaving the GOP because the GOP left him by allowing Trump to be the nominee. What rock was this self-proclaimed quintessential conservative hiding under when the Tea Party was agitating -- nay, begging -- for the GOP to adhere to conservative principles? Where was he the last 30 years when conservatives reluctantly voted for moderates like Dole, McCain, and Romney, and for some, both Bushes? What planet was this National Review sweetheart living on such that he missed the noise conservatives made whenever a candidate they supported turned out to be a quisling once inside the Beltway? Got Martha McSally?
The GOP left conservatism in the dust decades ago, but I guess Jay Nordlinger’s been too busy typing about being a true blue conservative to notice.
GOP leadership and punditry can ignore the people they ask for money, votes, and support, only for so long. They can water down conservatism only for so long. As some point the masses will rebel and that is happening with the ascendancy of Donald Trump.
But why do so many informed, intelligent conservatives support a guy who is so unpolished? So inarticulate? So inconsistent? So unprepared? Someone who, in the words of the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberly Strassel, is clearly winging it?
Conservatives and a significant part of the general voting public have tired of the polished, perfectly groomed candidate. Their handshakes and slick-talking don’t matter anymore. Their scripted talking points and sound bites are so rehearsed and predictable, as to be rendered meaningless.
And what did voting for the “most presidential” or “most conservative” candidate get us, anyway? An endless string of electoral heartbreaks. How many times can the average grassroots activist make personal sacrifices to get out the vote for a candidate who secretly harbors intentions to betray the very people who got him elected? We will not be jilted again.
Trump is the exact opposite of what we are used to. When it comes to messaging, conservatives are chronically cerebral with a long history of appealing to the rational brain as opposed to the emotional brain. Maybe Trump has the right idea: your average Joe doesn’t have time to decode a speech, read between the lines in a campaign ad, or research the finer points of policy. Appeal to the gut. It worked for Obama.
Maybe, we just want to believe that the person inhabiting the White House loves this country, will do his best to keep us safe, will work hard in the best interests of the majority of citizens, and will seek policies and a way to govern that balance the most amount of freedom with the least amount of intrusion. Maybe. It’s. Just. That. Simple.
Trump is the same guy we’ve always known -- not a prepackaged stiff in a suit, with perfect hair and a glimmering smile. A billionaire, yes, but the kind of guy you really could have a beer with. When he wears his hat, it looks at home on his head -- not out of place like Al Gore in lumberjack garb. And his speech is his -- not that fake preacher drawl Obama acquired halfway through his campaign or the “I ain’t no ways tired” other worldly thing that came out of Hillary’s mouth.
Sure, Trump has a shtick. But there is an authenticity to his shtick. It isn’t feigned. It isn’t newfangled. Donald’s political shtick today is the same shtick he had as a real estate developer, a casino builder, and a reality show host.
Truth be told, Trump is as much a cult of personality as Obama is -- and maybe that is how we win elections in the 21st Century. Obama had little to no real political experience, but was uber-successful in marketing the persona of Barack Obama. He accomplished little in Illinois and the Senate but he used his election successes to leap frog to the presidency at warp speed. He is the penultimate empty suit whose penchant to divide borders on OCD. He is a master at condescension and insulting his political rivals and their supporters, and is adept at sleight of mouth and doublespeak. He has no compunction manipulating everything that happens in the world to promote his agenda. But mostly, he is a marketing phenom who stirs emotions, instills pride, and promises something greater than each of us.
He does sound a bit like Trump. Obama might be a cocky empty suit with an answer to everything, but for Democrats, he was their empty suit. And he promised them Hope and Change.
Trump might very well be a brash political novice with answers that sometimes make us cringe, but he’s our political novice. And he’s promised to Make American Great (Again).
We’ve tried it the formulaic way time-after-time and things have only gotten worse. At least this time, if Trump wins the election but fails as president, we can shrug our shoulders and walk away knowing we gave it the old college try, but didn’t get hoodwinked in the process.
Trump is the mirror image of everything political that has been thrown our way -- he is not politically correct, he is not rehearsed, he is not scripted, he is himself, and he doesn’t care about the press. While he might overpromise and underdeliver, we’ve already factored that into the calculus. We know the risks of a Trump presidency and we’re okay assuming those risks rather than throwing in with the known risks of what a Hillary presidency will bring.
In a Venn Diagram world with conservatism one circle and Trump the other, a distinct area of overlap lies where the two intersect. Juxtaposed with Hillary’s circle, however, the circle with conservatism is lightyears apart.
I remain wishy-washy no more.
With 49 dead in Orlando, the Supreme Court hanging by a thread, a country more divided than ever, and an economy on the verge of collapse, it’s hard to imagine how the #nevertrumpers couldn’t see the obvious… unless, of course, they’ve already drunk the Kool-Aid.