Keeping My Sanity

With the latest Twitter rant by the liberal/leftists, I'm doing my best to keep my sanity by reciting the Serenity Prayer. It goes like this:

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference. Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971)

While this has been a prayer for recovering alcoholics, it helps me keep perspective about the craziness today's liberals are exercising. (I also am wondering if there's any significance to the year Niebuhr passed away and the date mentioned for the interview referred to in the link I'm providing here.)

They're now attacking dead people's views!

As you'll discover when you use the link to MRCTV's article about the latest Twitter issue the liberals are fomenting about, their insanity has gone over "the edge." As with most things happening today in our world, it's becoming obvious to me, and I believe you'll agree, the extremist views of the liberals/leftists are certainly beyond the pale.

It is my conviction that the reason these AOC types are reacting to insensitive comments today like they are is because they've been over protected by their parents with an ideology which has created it. Here's what I shared with a friend via an email I sent in response to his amazement about a situation down in his area:

The reason 16 - 18 year olds aren't mature enough to not run out in front of a vehicle and get run over is because they've been coddled and sheltered by both "helicopter" and "lawnmower" mom's* all their lives; no consequences for their stupid or dangerous behavior since birth!

* Helicopter moms = Those who hover over them to keep them from learning that natural consequence of stupid acts or decisions.

* Lawnmower moms = Those who cut down all resistance, obstacles, or difficulties, to their learning the work ethic necessary to succeed in a competitive world.

P.S. Most of these types of moms don't realize the damage they're doing to their progeny, then wonder why they continue to live in the basement into their 30s or 40s.

 It makes one wonder where we're headed!

The Right to Self-Defense: Is It Being Impaired?

This is a very complex and convoluted issue. There are many varying opinions as to whether, or not, initiatives like the one recently passed in Washington State - 1639 - which seems to obviously counter what the state's Constitution says about the matter of self-defense and the right to bear arms is being impaired. 

My take on why it is so complex and convoluted for most citizens of the state, is that a long established maneuvering of political influence, partly from local levels like Seattle, and state levels like the state Supreme Court - or, as one of our recent radio talk show hosts liked to call it, the "Seattle Supreme Court" - that is stacked with judges who are blatantly liberal in their ideology regarding firearms use and an interpretation of the meaning of the language in the state's Constitution on self-defense and public safety, is entrenched in our state's legal arena.

Reading this article by the Gillfords Law Center makes it clear as to the bias of the State Supreme Court which I speak above. While it cites cases where the decision has "balanced" the state Constitution's right for a citizen to self-defense in their own home, it ignores two glaring points when it comes to this new law's impairment of that right.

First, it speaks only to the criminal act of those carrying a weapon. It ignores the legal right to carry concealed in public for the purpose of self-defense should an individual encounter an illegal act being committed by someone in public. Furthermore, it also ignores the individual's right to keep, in their home, a firearm for self-defense handy for fending off an intruder threatening their life when the new law requires that the homeowner keep their weapon(s) in a locked device to keep children, who might be in the house, from accessing it.

Notice I use the word "individual" here, because the state's Constitution specifically uses this word in addressing the issue. Today, the emphasis is on the "collective", or public, safety which seems to now take precedence over individual rights by liberal/socialists.

More recent communication by the state's Attorney General, Bob Ferguson, has focused on county sheriffs claiming they would not perform background checks under the new law. But this report on the issue says that:

A large number of county sheriffs around the state, including Rick Scott in Grays Harbor County and Robin Souvenir in Pacific County, have recently said they would not actively enforce the initiative based on what they see as a conflict with the right to bear arms in the U.S. and State Constitutions. [Emphasis mine.]

The new law specifically enforces citizens who have weapons in the homes to have them locked up to prevent children from getting to them, but at the same time impairs the individual from accessing their weapon to defend themselves in the case of a burglar entering their house. Yet, if one doesn't, then - starting July 1st of this year - if their weapon is stolen from their house by a thief and is used in a crime, the owner can be prosecuted! Does such a law respect the individual's right? It has nothing to do with public safety in this instance!

But A.G. Ferguson appears to make it out as though they're saying they refuse to perform them on "semiautomatic assault rifles."

The law goes into effect July 1. In his letter, Ferguson said, “Just like handgun purchases, local law enforcement officials are required to perform these background checks. As far as I know, no Washington sheriff or police chief has refused to perform these enhanced background checks for handguns. Why refuse to perform them for semiautomatic assault rifles?”

Could it be that the definition of  "assault rifles" doesn't apply to those who carry concealed, or keep their self-defense tool in their homes for protection? Note that the definition of "assault rifle" is as follows, using the key term of "for infantry use" in it?

as·sault ri·fle

Dictionary result for assault rifle

noun

noun: assault rifle; plural noun: assault rifles

1. a rapid-fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use.

Since the State Constitution already specifies that this right doesn't allow for organized militias, military, or armies, then why does the A.G. insist on using it? It seems to me that the Media (D) is counting on the average ignorance by its viewers/readers to get away with not realizing just how stupid the A.G. is about this issue. He seems to be letting his ideology get in his way of his requirement to understand the law clearly.

Impeach Trump? How About Impeaching Pelosi?

In my January 31st post titled, "Why So Radical, Speaker Pelosi?" I shared an article which reported how Pablo Escobar's brother is funneling money from his drug cartel in Columbia to get the president impeached. It's easy to understand how shutting the border down will cripple their flow of drugs into the U.S. considerably and thus dry up the money.

In that post, I also conjectured that it is plausible that some of that funding is going to Democrats, like Speaker Pelosi, in an "under the table" way, giving her and possibly others reason to take such an anti-protection position on closing the southern border. To understand more clearly why I'm convinced the Democrats are now more concerned about power and control in the game of national politics than the safety of its citizens, I urge you to watch the video below:

I don't know about you, but this is clearly Saul Alinsky style tactics being used here! For even more supporting information about this whole mess we now find ourselves in, I urge my readers to check out this piece in the Western Journal about what Rush Limbaugh said to Chris Wallace about it. Be sure to watch the video - linked to in the article under the title "Fox News Sunday" - it's VERY informative. I believe he's "spot on"! Most enlightening! Even more enlightening is the book, "Spygate" by Dan Bongino.

Then, there's this brief video clip from Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) who explained why he voted against the bill presented to Congress and the president as a "compromise". Boy, I would LOVE to have a Senator, or two, like this one!

Now, there's a group which is promoting a petition to get Speaker Pelosi impeached. Here's what the Conservative Response Team is saying about it today:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

NANCY PELOSI DECLARES LEGAL ACTION AGAINST PRESIDENT TRUMP

Friend,

Nancy Pelosi and California have begun to take legal action against President Trump for declaring the border crisis a national emergency.

Pelosi and her minions plan to block the President from taking the necessary steps to protect our families and communities.

With Speaker Pelosi's lawlessness threatening the safety and security of ALL Americans, more Congressional leaders are abandoning her.

As you've seen, it took months for Nancy to narrowly secure her Speaker position with less than a handful of votes, and she knows it won’t take much for a small group of Congressmen to turn on her.

If enough jump ship, nothing would stop an impeachment vote, removing her as House Speaker -- it's time for her to pack her bags and go back to California.

This is why I’m asking you to please sign your petition to IMPEACH Nancy Pelosi for Crimes of Treason.

The Constitution defines treason as, "Treason against the US.. ..adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

Illegal Alien Criminals are enemies that invade our country with drugs, human trafficking, and terrorists, causing death and crime to the American people.

Nancy Pelosi adheres to these foreign enemies by voting for and providing them aid and comfort through Sanctuary State Policies funded by US Citizen taxes.

Not only that but she refuses to protect the American people by refusing to fund our border wall leaving them open and unsafe.

This petition urges your Congressman and US Senators to remove Pelosi and additionally the White House and the Federal Govt. to begin an investigation to her ties to foreign illegal alien special interests.

The petition highlights how Nancy has committed reprehensible crimes against the American people, and is jeopardizing the security of Americans just to obstruct the President.

Her hatred for President Trump, border security, and the average citizen has drastic consequences on our country and it must be stopped.

Nasty Nancy even refused to meet with the victims of Illegal Alien Criminals.

So please, sign your petition to Impeach Nancy.

When you’re done signing, please consider chipping in any amount to help us send your petitions, faxes, and email blasts to Congress and the White House.

In Liberty,

Christopher Ekstrom

= = = = = = = = = = = = = =

I don't know whether this will catch on, but if this nation doesn't take action NOW, it may well be too late! Looking at this from the perspective of today being President's Day and Christian, I appreciate what Jason Yates of MyFaithVotes.org says regarding our obligation to bring our faith into our nation's government.

Today, provides America more than just a three-day weekend, shopping sales or extra time with friends and family - it’s a time to celebrate our nation’s leaders.

However, considering recent abortion reports swarming the news and policy talks at an all-time high, I wanted to take this Presidents’ Day to bring us back to the heart of our nation’s foundation and our obligation as Christian citizens.

George Washington pioneered the way for the presidency in the United States. Instead of kings who rule for entire lifetimes, he envisioned an America where the people would rule. No one person would hold the power of our nation, instead Americans would remain in control.

And this power would be kept in check not only with a balanced system of government, but also by a moral compass. Our Founding Fathers all possessed a reverence for God and His word, and as a result, they formed a unique system entrusted into the hands of the American people.

In the year 1789, Washington, in his very first inaugural address, stated, “the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained.”

Washington’s words warn us never to depart from the road of biblical principles.

During this Presidents’ Day, I pray that you find an extra moment of rest, but also find time to reflect on what it looks like to influence this nation with biblical principles just as our leaders have done.

There are three simple, yet profound reasons as Christians we are called to bring our faith into the government realm. I encourage you to take a few minutes today to read My Faith Votes full article on why we should be engaged in the civic responsibility.

#TaxScam or #NeverOwedBefore - The Rude Awakening

Like others across the nation, I saw a news report - well, actually I was half-paying attention to it in the background while busy doing something - about some household in Texas who was getting hit with owing the IRS several thousands of dollars, rather than getting the return they expected.

While it did mention the changes in property taxes being capped with the president's new tax cuts for last year, the explanation wasn't real clear as to how it affected this family's tax outcome for this filing period we're currently in and why they owed so much money.

I suspected there was something the report was deliberately omitting, or not telling the viewers about; isn't that the "modus operandi" of today's Media (D)? Then, this report from MRCTV popped into my mailbox this morning and, after reading it I clearly understood what the report I saw earlier on this topic was leaving out.

Because tax payers have become conditioned by the IRS over the years to have more deducted from the paychecks and have gotten back at filing time a modest to large return for having had more deducted than they needed to, they've become reliant and expectant about getting it this year, but, depending on how they have their taxes done - themselves, an tax accountant, or financial planner - the change of the property tax cap which was part of the tax cut changes, were not factored into how it would impact their new filing outcome; in other words, they didn't adjust their deduction to compensate for it.

Voila! Many have either gotten less money back, or now owe the IRS money they've never had to pay because of that change. Yet, the media is using this circumstance to portray it as a failure. This is so typical of them! I'm convinced this subtle conditioning of taxpayers is how they easily manipulate them; especially those who don't understand adequately what they need to do to compensate for a change. (Evidence: The white haired lady in the video said, "...thanks to the Trump administration!")

What the Media's (D) failing to point out was that due to the tax cut change, these people were getting a small amount more in every paycheck each pay period, which many may not have noticed because it was not a significant, or noticeable amount each month, and they most likely didn't adjust their deductions because of the change on property tax, either themselves or with their tax accountant or financial planner.

If you want to understand better how our government's tax system works, just watch this video.  It might help you to realize why the liberals & socialists play the rich against the poor.

The Green New Deal of AOC's

No doubt you've heard about the proposal put forth by Alexandria Occasio-Cortez; the youngest person ever elected to Congress from New York City.

I won't spend a lot saying anything about it here, but...

Her "Green New Deal" has recently been critiqued by none other than billionaire Bill Gates.

Here's the Heritage Foundation's take on it, as well. 

Oh, and BTW... I've got to give kudos to NBC for having the hoots bah to posting the Senate Investigation Committe's actual findings on the "Russian Collusion" claim by the Media (D). I bet they're all saying to themselves, "What a big disappointment! We thought we'd done a good job of convincing everyone on this."

The Left's Divisiveness Goes On

It was in the '90s when the Clintons initiated the concept of political correctness. Now, it's become a weapon, used by the leftist/socialists, to bully anyone who opposes, or disagrees with their ideology. Today, I've come to view this political correctness as the left's modern religion, without the forgiveness if you're liberal or socialist; most of the time.

I say "most of the time" because my previous post - Lesbian Gets Kicked Off Gay Rights Commission - points out how you can be a leftist ideologically, but still get punished for not conforming.

But what exactly is this "political correctness", and what are it's origins?

My personal research has revealed to me that it came out in the '90s with the Clintons in the White House because of Hillary Clinton's college thesis paper on Saul Alinsky. (Bill was too busy raping women to care about what Hillary did.) Anyone who's looked into her association with this man, who was an avowed communist, knows that his mode of operation to get his way in organizing the workers of Chicago involves the principles he spelled out in his book, Rules For Radicals. This was exposed by some who did their homework during her recent run for the presidency against Donald Trump. (For a slightly more in-depth insight into this man's history, check out this short video clip.)

One of those principles is to take one's opposition and use specific tactics to create an impression in the public's eye that is undesirable by using his list of rules:

1. "Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have."
2. "Never go outside the expertise of your people."
3. "Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy."
4. "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon."
6. "A good tactic is one your people enjoy."
7. "A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag."
8. "Keep the pressure on."
9. "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."
10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
11. "If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside."
12. "The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative."
13. "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."

Examining this list of concepts he used, and trained others to use, effectively and without any compunction, has become, in my view, the foundation of the left's movement using what is now political correctness today. 

For anyone who lived through the Obama administration's eight years, it should be obvious these rules were utilized by him as well. After all, Obama's climb to prominence originated in the Chicago area and it is known he studied and used Alinsky's rules as well.

So, under the guise of creating a "utopian society" the left is actually effectively balkanizing the country for the purpose of pitting factions against each other. Rather than working to unify individuals behind our nation's freedoms, liberties, and opportunities, it is pandering the base nature of the selfish, greedy, envious, and unscrupulous, individual to generate hate and chaos.

If you think my stating this is too far fetched, then I suggest one watches this short video or, this short video, which explains how the Southern Poverty Law Center and leftists use such rules of Alinsky's to bully organizations on a massive scale today.

Lesbian Activist Kicked Off Gay Rights Commission

Well, boys and girls, oh wait, should I use those pronouns? Anyway, as the title for this post states, a lesbian, Julia Beck, was kicked off the Baltimore Gay Rights Commission for using the wrong pronoun to describe a rapist. Yes, you read that correctly. Here's what Trace Gallagher on Tucker Carlson's show shared about the issue.

Julia Beck was offered the chance to join Baltimore Mayor Katherine Pew's LGBTQ Commission and Beck thought it was a prime opportunity for her to voice the concerns of the under represented. But, as the only lesbian on the commission, she immediately felt excluded.

She even wrote an article titled, "How I became the most hated lesbian in Baltimore" (afterellen.com). Beck writes that she committed the unforgivable saying, "Even if a male identifies as a female he's still a male." She cited the case of the convicted rapist Karen White, who is legally a man admitted to raping several women and was then sent to a women's prison in the U.K. where he proceeded to rape two other female inmates.

After all that, it remains unclear if Karen White, who was David Thompson, is actually in the process of transitioning into a woman. But, according to Julia Beck, questioning the White's gender was the final straw, and she was kicked off the commission, writing:

After a month long witch-hunt, I was found guilty of "violence." My crime? Using male pronouns to talk about a convicted male rapist who identifies as transgender and prefers female pronouns... It is far more criminal for me to call a rapist "he," than it is for him to rape.

We contacted the Baltimore Mayor's office for comment. It had no comment.

Now, here's the interview with Julia Beck on Carlson's show and what she had to say about this issue. I urge readers to watch this carefully, for it reveals some very important points which we all may be facing in the future, either in the workplace, or just interacting with people we meet, for which we are unaware might be going through the process of "transgendering," if there's such a word, and we might offend them. Be careful!

If you think I'm being over-reactive, then I offer you this video of John Stassel interviewing Jordan Peterson. I hope it opens your eyes to the reality of what kind of insanity the college students of the millennial age, or younger, today have been insisting we change to.

Well, I guess that movie title from several decades ago wasn't too far fetched after all. I'm referring to, "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad, world!" But it's getting down right scary, if you ask me.