#27 The New Abortion laws.

There have been a few laws lately being passed in state legislatures that abortion is now a hot topic once again.  Ohio, Kentucky, Virginia, New York just to name a few are either banning more procedures or allowing more procedures.  And the internet is going wild with stupidity.

It all comes down to human life.  We know that.  The question is, "when does life begin?".  One side says it is at conception.  One side says it's not until the baby is outside the mother's womb.  And another side says it is somewhere in between.  The answer is it is at conception.

Why is it not when the baby is finally outside the womb?  In no particular order:

A baby can survive outside the womb at 6 months.  So the last 3 months there is a fully functional life form.  Yes, it will need help to survive, but so does a 3 year old.  Here is an extreme but it is valid.  A baby that is being delivered is a few seconds from being "expelled" from the womb but is still connected by an umbilical cord.  How is one second the difference?  What if the woman accidentally pushed at the last second while the baby is being aborted and the child comes out...is it still abortion or murder?

Why is it not just before 24 weeks?  One argument I have seen in the last few months is ridiculous. One person said it's not a baby until 24 weeks, or 6 months.  He was claiming it was the same as a tumor before this point since it is "living".  Why is that wrong?  Again, in no particular order:

A tumor is an abnormal growth that hurts the body of the host.  The tumor cannot develop into something that can think, feel, and love.  The baby even before this magical 24 week period is destined given no tragedy to develop into a fully grown adult.  The tumor has no destiny.  The tumor left alone will in most cases kill the host and die with the host.  The baby left alone will continue to grow and push its way out and then continue to develop into an adult.  The person claimed tumors are life so it's the same as human life.  He also claimed there is a difference between human life and personhood.  That is a weak excuse.  Tumors are living cells but not human life.  Human life means there is soul.  A soul means feelings, thoughts, emotions and so forth are apparent.  Tumors will never develop into that.  Personhood I understand what they are saying is when rights are given to the human.  But what makes them human then?  This person claimed that human life is no more important than any other life.  That is not accurate.

Plants are monochotomous.  They only adapt and react to the environment.  They share no feelings.  They don't raise children.  They don't fall in love.  Animals are dichotomous.  They have feelings.  They show personality.  But they show no conviction.  They only have fight or flight response.  They make be able to think but they cannot reason the way we reason.  Humans are trichotomous.  We not only adapt.  We not only have personality.  We have more than just other life forms.  We have purpose.  We understand.  This is why we can eat plants with no problem.  This is why we feel we can eat certain animals.  But we do not eat humans.  So for this person to say that human life is no more important than other life must be ok with eating people.

Ok.  So that brings in law.  Roe v Wade made abortion legal.  Yes it is law and we have to respect that.  But keep in mind, the law allowed slavery at one point.  The law said African-Americans (slaves) counted as 3/5 of a person.  Just because it is law does not mean it is correct.  It only means how things are interpreted for the times.  However, it doesn't matter what laws are out there.  Laws will not stop abortion nor curb it.  The culture feels the need for it because of who we are.  Our promiscuity calls for abortion because many want to do the deed but not take responsibility for their actions.  And yes, both women and men need to take that responsibility.

Then the person talked about morality and claimed morality is subjective. 

That is both accurate and inaccurate.  It is accurate because people think they know better than other people so their ideas are superior.  It is in accurate because if we all have different morality systems and cannot agree on anything then the human race will die out.  It will be chaotic with no answers.  Murder is wrong.  We all agree with that.  We have an objective morality system.

The subjectiveness comes in the definition.  And those with no conscience or remorse (anti-social tendencies) define murder in a demented way, hence...abortion is not murder.

We live in a sick world.  This person is just an example of how sick we have become.  We have taken life and have downgraded it to a group of cells with no purpose.  This is what liberals and atheists have done.  Ohio and Kentucky may have the right heart but as stated before until the culture changes it won't matter how many laws there are banning abortion.  But on the other side laws that Virginia and New York are passing just send us down that pathway of destruction even farther.  Thank you liberals and atheists.

#26 Millennial Liberals are the most toxic group there is

Millennials.  That group that ranges somewhere between 15 and 35 years of age.  They think they know it all.  They think they have the authority to tell everybody that they know it all.  They feel entitled to it all.  They think they own it all.  They have no common sense.  They think all should be the same.  And if any of that doesn't happen then it's someone else's fault.

And they show no remorse about any of it.

Of course, it is our fault.  We raised them to where no one "loses".  We raised them with seat belts, hard hats, Neosporin (triple action ointment kind), a Kleenex box with aloe, warning labels on water, and full-time school psychologists.  And we somehow did it while we were drunk, high, divorced, promiscuous, and with no morality system to guide us.  Some of that is tongue-in-cheek.  Yes, Neosporin is good.  But the point is we coddled this generation so much;  we taught them to be "self-loving" and "sufficient" so much; we raised them that what ever they do is "ok" so much...that we forgot to actually teach them the lessons of life.

The worst one of them all is the heir-apparent, Princess Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  She is the epitome of this generation.  Not only is she the leader of this smart-mouthed ("who dis"), uneducated ("parts of government"), and inexperienced ("free education") generation, she is also the voice of the new Democrat ("Committee choices"), as if the old ones weren't bad enough.  She just doesn't get that her ideas are the reasons why millions of people have been killed in the past, millions of people are being hurt today, and that millions will suffer in the future.  All we have to do is look to the past, first.  We have forgotten the ideas of Stalin, Mao, Kim, and Castro.  Together they are responsible for 40 million deaths.  We have forgotten what it is like to hear the heart-wrenching stories of survivors from these countries.

Let's look back in short about the ideas of Marx, the father (blah) of communism.  He was raised in a secular family and his acquaintances in life pushed him farther away from any religious conviction.  Some may think that is not a big deal but it is.  It gave him no direction.  He went to a private school. (hmmm....)  He was coddled in his education.  And when he couldn't handle the way things were he got moved to other schools and even got expelled from higher education systems.  The Industrial revolution caused an inequality in human life (he had money) so he he came up with theories.  Life is about human struggle.  This struggle is based upon economic status.  Human existence will go through four stages of economic struggle.  The first one is feudalism.  Communities formed kingdoms but the king took power.  The rich rose up and took power from the kings and set up capitalism.  But he believed this system destroyed us so one day the working class (the proletariat) will rise up and take power away from the capitalists leaders (the bourgeoisie).  This will be a violent over taking and it will usher in socialism.  This system will have to create a forced equality on the people because it will not be easy for people to give up things and it will remain that way until everyone is equal.  Once that happens then the last stage of human existence will begin, communism, a utopia.  No need for government.  No need for laws.  All needs will be met.  A perfect world.

On paper, in theory, it sounds great.  Here is the problem.  It never gets out of the socialism phase.  The violence.  The forced situations upon the people by the government.  The control the government doesn't want to give up.  And we see this happening when we hear "Obamacare".  We are forced to give up our earned money to pay for people who to be quite honest don't deserve it.  We see this happening when we hear "free college".  It isn't free.  Even ding-dong said that, yet she didn't know she said it.  The regulations.  The forced "acceptance" and "tolerance" of things that go against our beliefs.  The higher taxes.  The impersonalization/depersonalization of life.  The lessening of any morality system.  The blaming of those who actually work hard for everyone's troubles.  It can never get to communism because socialism cannot work.

All we have to do is look at the present next.   Venezuela---CNN, FOX, NY Times, all you have to do is Google "Venezuela" and "chaos" and you get tons of articles all saying the same thing; Venezuela is not working.  And this is what "AOC" is trying to bring to us.  All because she has no idea.

All we have to do is look at the future now.  #millennialliberal, LOL, who dis, Instagram, earbuds...

#25 How to vote in the 2018 Mid-term elections.

If this is your first election here are some things to know. Take this advice and take ALL elections seriously.

• Vote for and out of optimism not out of bitterness and pessimism. Elections are not "payback" time. You may not like the last election or the people who got it but it should not be used as revenge or even as a referendum. It's a system to get the best we can not to hurt someone.
• Don't vote based on what your parents tell you, or your friends, or your union. This is YOUR voice. Vote based on your conscience. This is your chance to stand up for yourself, not someone else's misguided rhetoric or pressure. Especially don't listen to spoiled celebrities who are the biggest hypocrites there are.
• Don't vote ANY straight ticket. Some people are NEVER worthy to hold office...on either side of the aisle. Don't vote straight ticket just because you're anti-Trump or anti-"insert group here".  Not all people are like their parties. Some are STILL worthy in both parties.
• Don't vote based on color, or gender. Just because it's historical doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. Some things in history were the wrong thing. It's okay to vote on the actual person and not based on what they look like.
• Don't vote just because of popularity. Names mean nothing, nor should names mean you should disregard them. You need to know the person. Remember there are more than Democrats and Republicans.
• Know the facts! Don't listen to CNN, MSNBC, or Fox to get your facts. Don't listen to ANY commercial. Don't listen to any mail pamphlets. Go to government websites and look at the issues. Don't fall for propaganda.  They all have an agenda.
• Remember you live in a country that ALLOWS you to vote since it is your freedom of speech. Many people never get that chance. Many people died so you can have that chance.
• Whatever the outcome, be willing to accept it. Whoever wins will be running things. If they succeed WE ALL succeed. Hoping people fail is petty, selfish, and is part of the problem, not the solution. Protesting is a right but sometimes we don't get what we want. Live with it.

#24 Ideologies are the real issue

An ideology is a set of beliefs that affects who we are. An ideology forms our feelings and thoughts. It is the way we see the world. To each person this is how we separate truth from fiction. Ideologies can be extreme or very subtle. Ideologies at first are neither positive nor negative but many will consider them to be negative due to many people who go to extremes to get their point across. They can be overpowering or they can even be just casual. But, ideologies, no matter what type, all share certain types of characteristics.  Below is a list of these characteristics:

1. They all are theories about human interactions. A theory is an idea that explains a situation. It is not always the exact truth but a way of understanding an event or topic. Most theories are filled with facts, perceived facts, or some kind of data that backs up the idea. Not all theories are ideologies but all ideologies are theories. Such as the theory of evolution is not an ideology. But if all you can do is think about the theory of evolution then it becomes your ideology.  Evolution is just a way of explaining our existence, hence a theory.  But if you make everything revolve around evolution, like it explains each and every part of our existence then it has become your ideology.  For the most, ideologies want to explain how humans interact with each other. The individual uses ideologies to also explain why they feel humans should feel, believe, or act a certain way. 
2. They are built upon a struggle of human existence. Ideologies are formed when an individual, or groups of individuals, see a struggle in society. They try and change the things that may have caused the struggle. Ideologies then tend to help individuals form groups for support. Each struggle has a reason why it happened.
3. They are systematic, usually organized. Ideologies have programs that people get involved, in other words, they are more than just ideas; they turn into actions. People who believe in certain ideologies tend to stick together and stand up for each other even if there may be some differences, controversies, or humiliation. 
4. They grow by seeking recruits. Ideologies gather support by individuals spreading a certain idea.
5. They need rationalization as their basis. This is where perhaps many of the groups get the most negative imagery from the rest of the population. Rationalization uses pieces of truth and creates a larger idea that is not exactly the complete truth, yet the believer in the ideology believes it. Hence, this where point number one above comes back into the conversation. This larger idea becomes the main theory of the ideological group.  All ideologies have some kind of intellect or their own kind of logic to back up what they say. 
6. The biggest characteristic is that ideologies are personal. Ideologies can become dangerous to an extent. People who take the theories very personal will believe in it enough to die for it and could perhaps even kill for the belief. When this happens people are called extremists. 

There are many types of ideologies in existence, such as social classifications and lifestyles. But the three most common ideologies deal with politics, economics, and religions. 

Politics in modern day terms can be divided into three categories; liberalism, moderate, and conservatism.  Liberalism expresses openness in society, personal interpretation of morality systems, and personal freedom.  Liberalism ideology.  Conservatism expresses order in society, systematic morality systems, and protection of individuals. Conservatism ideology  Moderates swing to one side or the other depending on the topic. 

Economics have two major categories; capitalism and communism. Capitalism expresses personal choice when it comes to money and less government involvement when it comes to supplies and resources. Communism expresses equality created by the government and control of resources by the government so there will be less wasted by the individual. In capitalism the individual gets to own their own property and can create their own business and have opportunities to make the most they can. In communism the government controls the property and makes the opportunity for all to be equal by dividing the wealth of the people. Economic ideologies

Religion has three thoughts; Theism, anti-Theism, and agnosticism. Theism is a belief in some sort of Supreme Being or essence, if you will. Anti-Theism refers to a belief that claims there is no Supreme Being hatred of any Supreme Being. Agnosticism is the idea that there is a possibility of a Supreme Being but the probability is low.  Religious ideologies

If you noticed most ideologies have the suffix “ism”. This does not mean however that all words with “ism” at the end should be looked at as negative. It strictly means that there are individuals who take the belief seriously or very personal. Not all beliefs turn into extremism. The ones that usually become extremism usually combine one or more ideologies. That is why many people try and quote, “Never mix politics and religion”. Again, that is not to say it is wrong to do it or that it is automatically a negative thing but when it turns into extremism people need to keep an eye on it. Religions at this point become cults. Politics become radical. Economics become a basis for discrimination.

All theories can be looked at but you have to be careful about how far you take it.  There should be no political party ideology.  This split between Republicans and Democrats is an idiotic ideology.  Just because the president and congress may be in different parties does not mean they should automatically stand in each other's way.  You may disagree with a person but that does not mean you have to be their enemy.

#23 School shootings are only a result

School shootings are not the problem.  They are a result of something bigger.

As with every new school shooting the two sides of the 2nd Amendment argument start to rear their ugly heads.  And it's the same argument each time.  One side says that guns should be regulated and we wouldn't have these issues if guns were off the streets.  The other side says that these things will still happen even if no one had guns and guns are the only things that stop the criminals.  Both sides are correct and both sides are idiotic.

These things will keep going on because we don't understand the problem.  Most are blaming the wrong things.   We fail to recognize that we are only treating the symptoms without addressing the disease.  Most don't even know the difference.  To every disease there are a few things we need to know about it.  There is a direct cause for the disease.  The disease shows symptoms.  Other factors come into play that affect the way the disease spreads. And then we have to deal with the results.  But just like any disease it could have been prevented if we know the cause.  Like most diseases it can be treated.  Like some diseases we can control the factors.  But once it gets this far, like no disease it can be stopped.

Here are the steps of the disease, in reverse order.

• The results---Death.  We have mass carnage that we have to deal with.  We have families that are torn apart.  We have children who are traumatized for life.  We have schools who feel unsafe and fear grips us.  Others get angry and start to blame the factors or symptoms.  We offer prayers.  We grieve.  And then we move on until it happens again.
• The factors---Blame.  We tend to blame these and feel as though dealing with these is the answer.  This is not to say that we should not be dealing with these because we should, but this will not solve the whole problem.  We shouldn't just blame these and feel justified.  Mental illness is a factor.  We live in a world that has fallen and mental illness is a result of that.  Bullying is a factor.  We live in a world where the stronger feel that they can control others through intimidation  Worshiping the famous is a factor.  We uplift those who are famous and want to be like them.  When others get attention it causes some to desire that infamy.  People get famous for the news they make.  Some even do it on social media and get paid millions of dollars for posting videos of how stupid they are.  That brings in the fact that social media is a factor.  It just adds into the infamy, bullying and worshiping that has already been mentioned.  And perhaps that biggest factor is how lazy we have become with parenting.  Adults who have children are no longer in the lives of their children.  They don't get  involved.  They don't ask.  They don't share in their feelings.  And they don't know what is going no in their lives.  Children have no guidance.  But all of these are results of the symptoms.
• The symptoms---Selfishness.  Guns are a symptom.  But it's not what you think.  The argument of "guns don't kill people, people kill people" and "yes, but if the person didn't have a gun then the gun wouldn't be a problem" is always brought up.  Look, both have good valid points.  If there were less guns then there would be less gun violence, period.  And yes, the gun in and of itself sitting there will not kill anyone. All should know about gun safety.  Blah, blah, blah.  Overall the gun is not the issue.  Freedom to own a gun is not the issue.  The issue about guns and what makes it a symptom is the fact that some feel the need to have a gun.  Guns have been around for 600 years.  It's only the last 50 years that the problem has been around and has escalated in the last 20 years.  The feeling we need to have a gun is the issue and a symptom.  The entitlement attitude is a symptom.  Some feel they need to have things and that they deserve things and the should have it now.  This causes self and instant gratification.  We become disrespectful of traditions, order, wisdom, and authority.  The main symptom is our selfishness.  But this selfishness is caused by the disease.
• The disease---Our culture.  We live in a world that has lost its purpose.  This disease has a cause.
• The cause---We lack love.  But even more we don't know what love is.  We have masked love as tolerance and acceptance.  We say that we love our partners, spouses, significant others, but too many times it's only lust.  We have so many distorted ideas of love that we feel love is only temporal.  Love is conditional.  We treat love as though it is okay to be apathetic.

The problem is that we think we can change the result if we find a cure.  But our cure to all of this is with anger and loud voices.  We can protest, write letters, run for office or whatever all we want.  We blame the factors by making wild claims and forget the other side.  We treat the symptoms by passing laws.  We get paralyzed by the results and settle for non-action.  We need to address the disease by acknowledging the cause.

The cure is true love.  True love is patient, kind, doesn't envy, doesn't boast, and isn't proud.  It's doesn't disrespect, or is self-seeking.  It is not easily angered.  It forgives.  It doesn't like evil but it rejoices in the truth.  It protects, trusts, hopes, and perseveres.  True love lays down its life for its friends.

Until we know this kind of love, the disease spreads.

#22 Liberalism has killed the Millennials (and they don't even know it)

Looking at the generation that is ready to start their careers and starting the major turns in life puts fear into the hearts of the generations before.  But let's face it, the generations before the millennials are the ones who raised them to be this way.  Nothing, absolutely nothing has destroyed this generation though more than liberalism.  Liberalism always destroys.  Maybe those who believe in feel they are doing good and creating a brave new world but in the end it brings nothing but destruction.

In liberalism, everyone is rewarded.  There are no losers.   In the late 1990's many wrestling tournaments as an example started to change the way they said things.  Instead of saying the "losers' bracket", they would say the "non-winners", as if that was really different.  But what it did show is that apparently we had to start being more careful about what we say to be people, especially children so we didn't destroy their dreams.  Being alive was the achievement.  In reality that is probably accurate given the way we destroy life anyway.  Everyone gets a trophy.  We all meet in the winner's circle.  Even if you're 4'5" you can be the next Michael Jordan because mommy says you can.

• The problem with this way of thinking is that we are setting up false hopes.  Everyone thinks they will succeed because they were part of something.  We are setting an example for these millennials to not have goals.  They end up having no desire to do any better because they are "already winners".  Competition is too difficult for them so many just don't try.  They are afraid of actually losing.  And when they do they make so much drama about it as if once loss destroys all they have done.  That means they only try things that they know they will "win" at.  And because of this they always feel like they are right.  Remember they are never a loser, so they are never wrong.  Try and tell a millennial what they have done wrong and they will answer with some smart remark or give up.  They need to understand that life needs work.  They need to know that sometime things don't go right but you have to keep trying.  Sometimes you are wrong.

In liberalism, they teach that everyone should rely on others on ways to make things easier.  Technology is used by liberals and conservatives alike but listen to the example.  Yes, all technology can be used for good, but most of the time it is used to make things easier, a lazy way out of things.  It's ok to rely on others to get what we need.  Technology is no exception.  Everything is now at our fingertips.  All we have to do is ask Google, Siri, or Echo.  Millennials are constantly on their social devices.  That is how they converse, that is how they research, that is how they listen to music and read, that is how they stay connected with everyone around them, including those in the same room.  Everything has already been done for them.

• The problem with this way of thinking is that one day if all we do is rely on someone else having the answer then no one in the near future will be adding anything new.  We will have run out of those who have already did this and done that.  And because of all of this millennials do not know how to have a real conversation.  Emojis are not real life answers.  They do not know how to read people correctly.  There is no inflection on words.  People do not know how to actually express themselves since they are limited to 140 characters.  Then when they do talk to people they don't know how to control the volume or demeanor of their voices.  Everything sounds like an argument or a misunderstanding.

In liberalism everything is a right.  No matter what we do we have the right to feel a certain way, act a certain way, believe a certain way, or say whatever we want because of the freedom that liberalism stresses.  Yes, freedom of speech is the greatest thing we have but as Peter Parker's Uncle Ben said, "with great power comes great responsibility".  That freedom is often abused.  Just because you have freedom of speech doesn't mean you have to use it all the time.  Some things are not needed, but this generation feels they have the right, as in because they have an opinion, that they should use that right in all conversations.  No, sometimes SHUT-UP!!

• The problem with this way of thinking that if everything is a right, then there are no such things as consequences and we can all do what we want.  Lifestyles can be whatever you want because there are no absolutes.  That is absolutely wrong.  There are absolutes in this world.  But this generation has erased many of those lines we used to have drawn.  Things like abortions, sexual immorality, drunkenness, and drug usage on one side and then omission of caring, inactivity, and tolerance on the other side all hidden in the argument of "basic human rights".  It's not about abortion, it's about a woman's right to choose--wrong.  It's not about one man and one woman, it's about love--wrong.  It's not about using drugs, it's about feeling good--wrong.  The worse part is when you ask them about tolerance, they are only tolerant if they agree with you.  And if they don't agree with you then go back to the first issue above.

In liberalism everything is free and deserved.  Another distortion of basic human rights.  Free college, free health care, free contraceptives.  Where will it stop?  Free food!  Free housing!  Free clothes!  Free cars!  Free manicures!  Free make up!

• The problem with this way of thinking is life doesn't mean you deserve everything.  They feel they should get it no matter what.  They don't have the motivation to be any better.  They forget that somehow, someway, someone will still pay for these things.  How do you get food?  Someone grew it.  How do you get education?  Someone is using their talents to teach you.  How do you get contraceptives?  Well, first of all, have sex when you are ready for the consequences.

In liberalism there should be no religion.  If everyone is right then don't tell me about your religion because who's to say what belief is right?

• The problem with this way of thinking is without religion we have lost the last thing to believe in.  Yes, there are problems with "religions".  That is why people need to find the right thing to believe in, which is a different topic.  But we lost faith in our government.  We lost faith in our parents.  We lost faith in our systems.  The only thing left is our actual faith.  And now we are losing that too.  Without faith in something we lose hope.

This generation has lost all hope.  They have become lovers of themselves, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, and unholy.  It's no wonder why they feel like there is nothing to live for.  And this is what liberalism has caused.

#21 All forms of hatred need to addressed.

In light of the recent activity, Charlottesville 2017, the main sentence is that hatred never solved any issue in this world.  Donald Trump is not the greatest person on the earth and not the greatest of leaders.  He has already said some stupid things that conservatives do not agree with and certainly not with anyone from the other groups.  He does not stand for true conservative values.  The only reason why the GOP stands up for him, when they do, is because they want to try and keep the peace as much as possible.  Prediction is that soon they will abandon him.  With that said, there is some truth in what President Trump said about the riots; both sides are to blame...but for different reasons.

Why is the "alt-right" to blame?  First and foremost, they are not the alternative right.  They are in no way , shape, or form an alternative to conservative values.  It doesn't matter what they call themselves.  They are a hate group and it is embarrassing, and inaccurate, to be labeled on the same "side" as they are.  They spew hatred.  We do not.  They promote violence.  We do not.  They do not accept every race.  We do.  They have salutes and disrespect people who fought in wars.  We do not. The list can go on and on.  So, why are they to blame?  Simply put, they're idiots.  Idiocy is always a reason bad things happen.  They are promoting ideas that have been defeated by the USA twice (1865 and 1945).  Every thing they stand for slaps our military in the face.  Thousands died against this type of belief.  They have the legal right to protest per 1st Amendment, but do they have the moral right to do so?  No.  If they would just assemble, give their speech in a normal voice and then move on then fine.  But they do not.  They protest, not because it is their right, not because they are right, not because they actually want laws passed.  They protest for one reason only; to spark an event to get them noticed.  They are idiots.  But our laws allow them to be idiots.  They are to blame due to their hatred but even more so because of their actions.

So if they are wrong then why is the left to blame as well?  The answer is as simple as the first.  They are idiots too.  Are they wrong for hating the hatred that Nazis spew?  No.  They are correct.  All hatred should be hated.  Are they wrong for protesting?  No.  Are they wrong for protesting protesters on opposing sides?  No.  But they are wrong in how they approach the other side.  Even though the words they speak sound logical and are on the side of acceptance, they are not.  They use the same rhetoric and mannerisms that the Nazis do.  Hence, there is not much difference between Stalin and Hitler.  If they just showed up with their signs and in larger number and kept peacefully to themselves, their message would have been heard more and received by more.  But they think they have to yell louder than the other side.  And that doesn't work.  They claim to be the people of tolerance but they only tolerate those who agree with their views.  Many of them showed up with weapons and got violent.  Not only did they get violent, some of them started the whole violent scene. They did not come there to protest idiocy.  They did not come there to protest a protest.  They came there to be just as loud and hateful as the other side.  And for that reason alone, they were wrong.

Donald Trump is partly to blame.  His rhetoric and "no backing down" attitude is ridiculous.  But to say he caused the situation or because of him people feel they can be racist or sexist gives him too much credit.  These people were idiots before Donald Trump came along.

Barack Obama is partly to blame.  His victimizing the minority and "backing down" attitude was lame.  He took sides when it came to race relations and those who voted for Trump saw that and pushed many over to Trump's camp.

And above all, the media is to blame.  Trying to find a news source that only reported the story instead of casting blame to one side or the other, or trying to find a news source that did not only do a story about how Trump or Obama responded, or trying to find a news source that didn't only do a story about Nazis or Antifa is almost impossible, otherwise it would have been posted here.

When one side wants to protest, let them.  Let them get all of their angry words out there.  Let them fly their flags and march.  Let them have their moment.  Eventually they will lose their voice. Eventually people will fly higher flags.  Eventually larger numbers of people will march for better reasons.  Eventually their moment passes.  They are allowed to have their opinion.  They are allowed to assemble and stress their opinion.  Once they do they will realize they are the minority.  If we do not give them their moment to shine they will fade away.  But instead we all come to these rallies with guns blazing, locked and loaded.

Hate may come in different forms, but it is all the same.

No matter who is to blame, that young lady's life should never have been cut short.  That cowardly murderer should have now just forfeited his rights as a citizen.  Condolences and sympathies go out to the young woman's family who lost her during this event. Her life should never been in jeopardy.

#20 This was a spit in the face of soldiers

If you want to sleep with whoever you want, go ahead.  If you want to express your feelings for whoever, go ahead.  If you want to show your pride in what or how you feel, go ahead.  After all this is the United States, the most free country in the world (Yes, it is, try somewhere else if you don't agree).  But if you do, then don't compare your life or struggles EVER with what our military goes through...EVER!  This picture is not disgusting because of the portrayed homosexual nature.  Who cares?  You're gay?  Then you're gay.  This picture is disgusting because it makes it seem like this community is fighting for the freedom of all people.

Not even close.  The soldiers raising the American flag put their lives on the line not only for the freedom of their own country but for the whole Pacific Ocean and eventually freeing the Japanese from their own form of tyranny.  They dodged real bullets.  The sweat real blood.  They lived in real fear.  And most of all what they did was they fought for real freedom.  What did these on the right do? All they are doing in REALITY is fighting for sexual activity rights.

One could say they are doing it for everyone else but they are the only ones who received any "benefit" out of their struggle.  To be honest if they fought for this then they would fight for incest, bestiality, pedophilia, and necrophilia. NO!  This is NOT comparing these sexual activities with each other.  It is just saying that other sexual activities have a law against it, based on mankind's feelings.  Most homosexuals like most heterosexuals would say that pedophilia is sick.  But why?  They can't argue religious reasons because that is what they say is argued against them.  It is only sick because of our culture saying it is.  A person 40 years old having sex with someone 17 years and 364 days is wrong but the next day it's okay?  Why can't two siblings have sex?  Is it nasty?  By whose terms?  Can't be just religious.  It must be the culture.  So, the fight for freedom here on the right is not like the fight for freedom on the left.

One could say they are fighting against tyranny.  Then who is the tyrannical dictator they are fighting against?  It must be America since they changed the flag.  America must be the enemy since they are raising their own flag.  They must be saying that their flag is more important than all our country's flag.  The US, the freest country in the world, is their tyrannical enemy?

One could say they are fighting for minority groups who don't get a voice.  Why are there no women in the picture?

One could say they are fighting for equality.  Then all flags of all groups should be raised in the picture.  But wait, we already have that flag.  It has 50 stars and 13 stripes on it.

One could say that they are fighting for freedom of speech.  Then what are they saying?  Are they saying they are the new soldiers?  Are they the people who now do all the fighting?  Who knows if the soldiers on the left are gay or straight?  We don't.  But we sure know the ones on the right.

Yes, theirs has been a struggle to become more than 2nd class citizens.  That is understood.  Yes, there has been discrimination to this group of people.  That is understood.  Yes, there is a feeling of not belonging.  That is understood.  It is completely understood that this is not a perfect country or that not all people have had a voice in the past.  But that is NOT what this is about.  It is wrong and in poor taste because of who it replaced.  Nothing more, nothing less.

No.  This, no matter what, no matter how you feel, no matter who you are, is a spit into the face of every soldier that died or fought for the sake of freedom.

#19 He needs to shut up.

Yes.  President Donald Trump needs to shut up.  But that is not this paper.  It is of course former president Barack Obama.  Maybe this is inaccurate but President Reagan never criticized President Bush when he left office.  President Bush never criticized President Clinton when he left office.  In fact he left him a note that was quite powerful and heartfelt.  President Clinton never criticized President Bush when he left office.  The two became friends and even helped each other with charities.  President Bush never criticized President Obama.  Some would say this article, Washington Times, proves that he did.  But he said government was the problem not one person.  Now while they were all campaigning, that is different.

However, now enter the most narcissistic president ever.  He criticized the Bush years.  He never took the blame for anything during his presidency.  And now he openly criticizes President Trump.  But we knew it was coming.  Even though President Trump is a loud-mouthed bully, and someone should shut his Twitter account down, it is still not the place for another former "dignitary" to try and topple them.

The only reason why he is doing it is because of his narcissism.  He feels that he never did anything wrong.  He only wanted the prestige.  If he wanted to change the country he would have stayed a Senator where he has no term limits.  If he wanted to make a change he would not have skipped on his last two years of being a Senator.  He saw the limelight and stepped out into it.  He wanted the fame and name.  If he didn't want this then he would shut up.  His time is over.  His legacy ruined many people.  He was a president for the minority, not the majority like presidents should be.  His policies, if they positively affected anyone, only helped the smallest number of people.  Cash for clunkers?  Turning over Bush's abortion policy (first thing he did in office even after saying in debate with McCain that it was above his pay grade, Debate).  Yes, Obamacare was only for the minority.  His executive orders.  Gay marriage (although this was not his idea, still only a few people).  My Brother's Keeper.  In other words, if you were white, male, straight, and Christian you had no chance in this presidency.  And for a president who said he was about equality, that would be hypocritical. Now, that is not to say that women, non-Christian, non-heterosexual practitioners, or non-white people are unimportant.  This is not to say that we shouldn't help those in minority groups of any kind.  What it is saying is that he only targeted groups that would vote for him or remember him in legacy form.  What it is saying is that he did not really believe in equality.  If we are "born this way", then white heterosexual males should not be penalized just because they have been in power for a long time.  Black lives matter?  YES!!!!  But all lives matter.  Women's rights?  Yes, but men should have parental rights too.  Freedom of speech and religion?  Yes, but Christians should be able to speak out without ridicule and defamation as well.

No, that president ruined most Americans.  His raising of the deficit to help a few we will be paying for decades to come, way more than all the other presidents we have had combined.  His raising of taxes, Obamatax, hurt the middle/working class, the same class that his mentor (Karl Marx) said we were supposed to help, i.e., the Proletariat.  These taxes were hidden.  For example, he changed the tax codes and made it look like a tax break but when the categories were re-evaluated and some were in different brackets, their taxes actually went up.  And on top of that his tax "breaks" were only $20 per paycheck.  That is enough for one meal at McDonald's per family each week.  President Bush gave $600 per adult, up front, one lump sum, enough for a down payment on a car.  His cash for clunkers raised used car prices so high that middle class families had to go further into debt buying new cars or settle for keeping their older unreliable cars for fear of going into debt.  Obamacare made most people pay more for their healthcare AND then forced us to pay for others.  That is not democracy.  His liberalism is not what the definition of classical liberalism, it is socialism, two terms that have consolidated from polar ends to become authoritarian, or as Bernie Sanders calls it Democratic Socialism.

Usually this site never gets personal, but his policies affected me, for 8 years and ruined my life. But because of that president's policies, me, the average American, lost $18,000 in those 8 years.  This stopped me from getting a safer and more secure car for my wife after her accident.  This stopped me from giving to more charities because my insurance went from $30 a paycheck to $90 a paycheck, thereby taking money I had reserved for groups like Food for the Hungry, local churches, and even family members.  This stopped me from adopting children because it takes a large down payment to get into the adoption system.  If I am the average American then how was that president for the people?

Do not say that that president progressed us.  Do not say that that president moved us forward.  He needs to go away.  He needs to shut up.  He should show SOME dignity like other former presidents.  Then again, maybe all presidents should shut up.

#17 The End of the Democrat Party

The first run of this blog started in 2008 was an attempt to get the population to understand what the future held if Obama became president. It didn't work. We failed twice of doing the right thing. The country is going in the wrong direction and it was predicted here. Most of the old posts were deleted. This blog started over again in 2014 because the anger got too much to hold onto inside after 6 years of total stupidity. Below was a prediction this blog made in 2008 after the election that year. It was called the end of the Republican Party.

"The Republican Party has seen the end of its existence as we know it. The party of Lincoln, Roosevelt (the good one), and Reagan is vanishing from the face of the earth. What happened to it? It lost its principles and its fire power. Too many GOP candidates are allowing the media to beat them up. They are allowing Hollywood to take over their campaign. They have given up on traditional conservative values thereby alienating the Christian base it once held close. It had been said that the Christian Right-wing conspirators put George W Bush into office. Pew Research Center says that 78% of "evangelical" White Christians voted for Bush in 2004. While 13% of Black Christians also voted for Bush. Adding these together the Christian vote may have been strong enough to carry Bush into a second term. The numbers for this election are not final but some sources say the number of white Christians dropped to around 70% while Black Christians dropped even more significantly. Race is not the issue but this is how media separated things for us. Undoubtedly, the only reasons why most Christians even stayed with the GOP was due to Sarah Palin. But in the end many saw her as not ready. The GOP also lost many due to Sen. McCain's maverick position. Many felt he would not stick to conservative values when needed. Then there are some who felt President Bush lost touch with the American people and if McCain was going to take his place it might end up the same. And then the last group voted for Obama as a protest against all of President Bush's policies. All of these added to the defeat of Senator McCain. But the bigger picture is the GOP might go down with him. The Constitution and Libertarian Parties may see huge rises in their support. The only way the GOP can gain momentum is by consolidating with other conservatives and/or by courting the so-called religious right or by completely changing its core values.  But it is the opinion that we have seen the death of the GOP."

After that election the GOP basically started to divide.  We saw the rise of the Tea Party faction, the strength of the Libertarian sect, and the pathetic attempt of the "establishment" to look more relevant. Due to these events mentioned and the last eight years that post proved to be true.  So, now that we have gone through 8 more years of disaster we can basically assume this is the end of the Democratic Party as we know.  The Democrats will be making changes.  They will be going extreme.  They will look for their base to swing hard left.  Some of this as a response to Trump, some because the Democrats have lost touch with the average person.  Either way the Democrats will never be the same.  They have lost the ideas of Roosevelt and Kennedy.  They will praise Obama for the next four years but will move even father away from him.  Voices like Sanders will be screamed.  Hillary will look like a moderate.  And maybe even nut cases like Dennis Kucinich and Howard Dean will gain popularity again, if they can lie to the youth and gain their support.

#13 If Sanders is elected we will feel the Bern

Before anyone jumps on the anti-bandwagon, this will hopefully be a series of what is wrong with most, if not all the candidates.  This is the easiest one to start with.

This is not to take away from the person of Bernie Sanders.  It is not an attack on who he is but what his ideas and policies would do to the United States and why he would be wrong for the presidency.  He is a self-proclaimed "socialist".  Now most will argue with that and say, no he is a democratic socialist.  But so what, Hitler called himself a National Socialist.  It doesn't matter what you call yourself, it is what you do that matters.

In a perfect world Sanders would be correct.  But in a perfect world Sanders would be wrong too.  Let's look at the things he stands for and what may be the issue.  All these are coming from his own website.

A Living Wage--Proposes a $15 per hour minimum wage.  In a perfect world, it would be nice if everyone could live the life of a millionaire.  No one would have to work.  No one would have to worry about bills to be paid.  Everyone would have a 4 story home with a pool and 3 classic cars in the garage.  But in a perfect world he is wrong because to get all of those things someone has to do the work.  Someone has to build the pool, car, and house.  Someone has to produce the materials, even if you built these things yourself.  It would be great if everyone could have these things.  But in reality it cannot be done.  The $15 would almost double what most minimum wage earners are getting now.  So how would that hurt?  Large corporations would not offer all the products they do now.  They would cut back and specialize only on a few products.  Sure, maybe someone would pick up the product but no one would compete against them.  If there is no competitions then that company can charge all they want and you are stuck with their price.  Then the government would have to step in even more to create price ceilings and more regulations that slow the business even more.  Adam Smith  wrote about the laws of competition and how when companies compete, the consumer wins.  Smaller businesses would not hire as many people out of plain fear that their business would not be able to afford to hire anyone.  Plus, who really makes minimum wage anyway?  Good companies but not a whole lot of experience or education is needed; McDonald's, Walmart, teenagers at their first job, pizza deliverers. etc.  Not many companies start at minimum wage anyway.  Not many adults who are worth anything take these jobs.  You stand at Walmart and all you hear is "when do I get my break", while they are bagging your groceries.  You order a cheeseburger and you get a fish sandwich.  The teenager is on their cell phone.  The pizza comes cold.  Sorry Bernie, the hike would not work and is not needed.  However, there could be a law that was passed that raises the minimum wage $1 every two or three years.  This would allow small businesses to make arrangements to meet the demands and would allow larger corporations to expand when needed without many layoffs or stoppage of products.

Free College--Make tuition free so graduates have no debt when they enter the workforce.  In a perfect world everyone would be educated first at home then with each level everyone would be educated even more.  No debt, no real estate taxes, no books to be bought, computers for everyone with access to the internet and all the technology.  No tests to pay for, no graduation fees for cap and gown.  But in a perfect world he is wrong because again, all those things that he wants free someone has to work, create, and/or be paid for.  How would professors earn a living?  How would books be paid for?  How would buildings and newer facilities with that best of technology get paid for?  In reality, not all people are college material.  Some are barely high school material.  Some would say education is a right.  Actually it is a privilege.  Why?  Because some people do not care about education.  If you do not care then you lose your right.  Now public education for children should be free.  Estate taxes should be gone somehow. but then again how are schools going to be built?  How would teachers be paid?  How would new textbooks and technology be accessed?  Yes, there needs to be a change in education but free college?  It would be paid for, but by the upper and middle class. He says Wall Street will pay for it.  How?  If more people went to college free then thousands upon thousands may enter the college.  That sounds good until you have to incur the costs.  Wall Street would not be able pay for all fluxion and growth.  That means tickets to extra curricular activities would raise.  Food on campuses would raise.  Colleges would find other fess like travel fees, security fees,  and other smaller things that are already free.  All this would stop the middle class person from succeeding in college.  And don't be fooled, the middle class is still the largest group in the USA.  Yes, interest rates are too high.  But there are already many scholarships and grants that most people can get IF they actually cared enough to try and get in high school.  Sorry, Bernie, it would back fire.

Creating decent paying jobs--Claims he would put 13 million people to work.  But doing what?  In a perfect world everyone would have a job and work according to their ability and need.  All would afford their luxury and accrue their desires.  But in a perfect world he is wrong.  Look at the jobs he said he would create:roads, transit systems, bridges, airports, seaports, etc.  We can agree that these replaced.  But his plan is to create government paying jobs to get these done.  Who would pay for it?  The middle class again.  If these need done give incentives for privately owned construction workers to be hired.  Local communities should be in charge of it.  But taxes would still have to be raised somehow to pay for this, unless the local communities could find other ways to do it.  This one is a no-win situation.  But who would your rather have in charge of the project, the government or the one who works for a living?  Sorry Bernie, the concept is great but it needs improved.

Supporting Black Colleges--Providing higher education opportunities for African-American students.  In a perfect world ALL students/people of ALL ethnicities would have this opportunity.  No discrimination.  No racism.  But in a perfect world he is wrong, these type of programs only offer more divisive opportunities.  How would offering these programs help African-American students?  They are not offering real world opportunities.  In a real world we are all on the same page and those who do the best should get the best.  Many of these colleges are watered-down and do not give a real world view.  There should be no "white" colleges, no "black" colleges, no "all-male" colleges, and no "all-female" colleges.  If we want true equality then we do not water down anything.  We do not make things easier for people to do, that just makes people lazier.  We need to add programs that offer challenge, innovation, motivation, and inspiration for ALL Americans.  In a world of division, especially created by Obama, and can see where a Trump presidency would go, we need someone who brings unity not more division.  Sorry, Bernie, this would add to racism, not equality.

Expand Social Security--In a perfect world we would all be able to retire at a young age and be able to live off what we made and have some left over to give to the next generation.  All would be able to afford their medical expenses and have a next egg for rainy days.  But in a perfect world he is wrong because first of all social security is an insurance program.  INSURANCE!  Not something that should be controlled by the government.  It's YOUR money, shouldn't YOU decide what to do with it?  The program was not supposed to be a permanent solution to a temporary problem (1930's).  If you expand SSI then again, it has to be paid for by someone.  What we need are incentives for people to save their money.  The government should not tell you what do to with your money and how much you need to save.  If people are dumb enough to waste their own money then that is their own allotted stupidity.  This is just another program that makes us lazier and tells people let someone else pay for you.  The private sector could hire thousands of people and offer a competitive retirement plans, even off of Wall Street.

The Iran Deal-- He supports the Iran nuclear deal.  In a perfect world there would be no nuclear weapons.  No war.  No terrorism.  No bad trade deals.  But unfortunately for this issue we are nit in a perfect world.  Iran had proven time and time again that they are a country that reneges on deals and has supported terrorism all over the world.  What should be done is a deal that says prove your worthiness first; the more you comply the more you will be given.  They have already broken the del twice and nothing has been done.   Sorry, Bernie, Iran needs to be dealt  with not made a deal with.

Racial justice--Black lives matter.   If you say no to this then take your seat in the back of the bus and be quiet.  But black lives matter campaign is actually the negative response to injustice.  Blaming the police for everything is not right.  If you break the law then expect consequences and if you resist arrest what is a police officer supposed to do, wait for something bad to happen and then respond?  Sorry Bernie, all lives matter and if it comes down to supporting the criminals or the police then standing behind those in blue is a better choice.  Where are all the protest against violence and crimes period?  If we had no crime then police would be less needed.  They are under fire today because they have perhaps the worst job to do.  If they can't use force then the criminal wins.  If they use force then they are villainized.  He claims that African-Americans are disenfranchised since they have a felony on their record.  Well, all felons have this done to them.  Should there be a way for felons to get back their vote?  Sure.  But those in prison do not get the right to say, remember they are there because they took someone else's right away with their criminal act.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/21/police-kill-more-whites-than-blacks-but-minority-d/?page=all
https://www.yahoo.com/news/maryland-policeman-killed-unprovoked-attack-chief-005009853.html

Other issues he is wrong about but too long to go into:  abortion, higher tax brackets, and Obamacare.  See labels for these.

Now he does have some good ideas but how can we get them done?  Equal pay, fair immigration law, caring for our veterans, supporting family values (although we disagree on what that is), climate change (although don't go extreme).

These are just seven components of what makes Bernie Sanders' presidential bid bad for America.  Everything he is promising sounds good in a prefect world.  And that is what Karl Marx said; a utopia.  But we know utopia does not work when the government will have to intervene so many times.  Socialism is socialism, it doesn't matter what word you put in front of it.  Socialism on paper may open the way for equality and a friendlier atmosphere but it reality it only causes laziness and more division.  People feel entitled to everything and they are not.  Some would always have to work to get us everything we need.  There would still be the haves and the have nots only the haves would have less than they do now.  Hundreds of thousands of Americans have given their lives to fight the tyranny of socialism and communism.  They fought for freedom and so that people can have the free will that we have.  They died defending the right to choose.  And now we have candidates who support the idea of taking away individual choice but disguise it as "democratic socialism".  Change is not good just because it's change.

And perhaps the biggest point is, where in all of history has socialism been good for the whole?  Not one society has been successful without killing, propaganda, and anything of the like.  No thank you.

#11 Calculating the candidates.

With less than a month now left to the Iowa Caucuses get underway, a process given too much importance to by the way,  here is a list of what to look for in a candidate.

The GOP:

• Those who do not matter are Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, John Kaisich, John Gilmore, and Rand Paul.  These four should just drop out and save money, time, and effort.  Their time is over and they perhaps should never run again.
• The bottom tier:

1. Chris Christie, New Jersey, two terms as a Republican governor is a very Democrat-hyped state, former prosecutor, former US Attorney.  Hot headed and out spoken at times (even his website says "Telling it like it is", but that may be due to his New Jersey background.  Often criticized for his weight.  His biggest obstacle though is his dealings with the shut down on the George Washington Bridge.  He was acquitted of all wrong doings but there is still doubt.  He is not part of Washington but has been part of the establishment recently.  His governorship brings his leadership ability up.  https://www.chrischristie.com/  Assessment:  Conservative values= 8, Leadership abilities= 7 Corrupted by DC= -1
2. Carly Fiorina, California, former CEO of Hewlett Packard, and AT&T.  A formidable opponent to Clinton but only because of her female status.  She did run HP but bad times hit and under her leadership it lost a lot of its stock value (could have been anyone at the time). Her emotionless features do not make her unattractive as Trump said, but makes seem her unattached to the people.  Even when she gets angry she shows no emotion and he voice never shows any inflection. But being part of the anti-establishment allows her to not be persuaded by lobbyists however Wall St might.  https://www.carlyforpresident.com/  Assessment: Conservative values= 9 Leadership abilities= 5 Corrupted by DC= 2
3. Jeb Bush, Florida, former two term governor of Florida, former business entrepreneur.  A family man with family values.  Almost everything he has been a part of has succeeded; his business actions, his terms as governor have mostly been viewed as positive barring any bias.  His biggest problems though are of course his name, although out of all the Bushes in politics he is probably the most stable, his business actions some think were unethical, and his personality is less than desirable.  He is even tempered but seems to smile at the wrong times. His strengths are that he knows how to be an executive and he has been out of the Washington loop for years.  https://jeb2016.com/  Assessment:  Conservative values= 9, Leadership abilities= 9, Corruption by DC= 0
4. John Kasich, Ohio, governor, former 9-term Representative of Ohio, business entrepreneur.  They either hated him or loved him in Ohio.  He has been known to fly off the handle but then turn around and be the calm one at the table.  He fought against unions but then backed down when Ohians said no to that.  He has executive experience but has been part of Washington problems before.  He is successful in his business endeavors.  He has turned Ohio around from the disaster that Ted Strickland brought.  His problem is he is not known.  His speaking skills are irritating.  And he karate chops the world when he speaks.  https://www.johnkasich.com/  Assessment:  Conservative values= 9, Leadership abilities= 8, Corruption by DC= -2

• The top tier:

1. Marco Rubio, Florida, three term Senator, five term state Representative in Florida.  Only one of three Hispanics in the Senate, he came from a upper class family who lived the American dream.  Although many will say that is his problem because even though he came from a upper class family he had his own financial issues.  He stands up for family values but his work in the Senate as been scrutinized for his lack of appearances.  His views seem to be very solid but he has been too much involved with Washington in the recent pass.  He may have good values and views but can he show up and do the job? https://marcorubio.com/  Assessment:  Conservative values= 10, Leadership ability= 6, Corruption by DC= -2
2. Ben Carson, Maryland but from Michigan, Neurosurgeon.  Former job hunter until he was accepted into medical school.  Credited with performing the first successful separation of Siamese twins joined at the head.  Part of many business board of directors.  He has published eight books.  He broke through poverty and showed what can be done when you actually rely on yourself and not the government.  He has no political experience but has been director of John Hopkins Hospital.  A great speaker, he has good ideas but perhaps too soft spoken. Could he lead with that type of demeanor?  https://www.bencarson.com/  Assessment: Conservative values= 9, Leadership abilities= 4, Corruption by DC= 1
3. Donald Trump, New York, Entrepreneur, TV Mogul.  Loud, obnoxious, but doesn't stand down to anyone.  His "outside Washington anger" is what fuels his campaign.  His executive decision making is what makes his leadership appeal strong.  But his values seem to change with time and his family values can be highly argued.  His wit can be either sharp or offensive and sometimes both.  He has the guile to be a leader but what he says may sometimes be too confrontational and divisive.  Her may not be corrupted by Washington but he may be corrupted by Wall St and even worse, Hollywood.  https://www.donaldjtrump.com/  Assessment:  Conservative values= 6, Leadership abilities= 7, Corruption by DC= 1
4. Ted Cruz, Texas, two term Senator, has held three government positions besides Senator and was a professor law in Texas.  He knows a lot about Constitutional law as that is what he taught in Texas. He is a family man full of family values.  His major problem is his attitude.  He comes across as confrontational and unsympathetic.  He is part of the establishment  as he has had many government jobs but none of them in the executive role but is also not really part of the mainstream corruption.  https://www.tedcruz.org/ Assessment:  Conservative values= 9, Leadership abilities= 7, Corruption by DC= 0

The DEMs:

• There is only now on tier as the bottom two have dropped out.

1. Bernie Sanders, Vermont, two term Senator, former EIGHT term congressman from Vermont, former Mayor in Vermont, small odd jobs including filmmaker.  Actually, an "independent" he always sides with the Democrats.  His socialist ideas are not mainstream but is the Donald Trump of the democrats as he reflects the "outside Washington anti-establishment for liberals" side.  He is very progressive and outspoken but has been in Washington for the last 18 years and has no competition in his small populated liberal state but he has no executive experience. His policies would be like Obama on steroids but with less prejudice. https://go.berniesanders.com/page/content/splash  Assessment:  Conservative values= 1, Leadership abilities= 6, Corruption by DC= -1
2. Martin O'Malley, Maryland, three term governor, former Mayor of Baltimore and city council for 16 years, served as chair of DEM governors.  A family man but fights for non-traditional family values.  He has not been part of Washington per se, his mother is highly involved in the last 30 years.  He did accomplish a lot during his tenures in all of his positions. and many of them have been positive in return.  https://martinomalley.com/  Assessment:  Conservative values= 2, Leadership abilities= 8, Corruption by DC= 1
3. Hillary Clinton, New York, former Sec of State, former two term Senator from New York, former First Lady of the US, former First Lady of Arkansas, former lawyer, involved with many charities.  She has been part of Washington for the last 23 years, by far longer than any other candidate.  Her problems are far more than this page can hold, scandal after scandal has followed her but perhaps the biggest is still happening, her TWO FBI investigations into her emails and Benghazi where four Americans were killed because of her indecision. She has done a lot more than Obama in her career does play the family woman very well expressing her being a grandmother all the time.  She is the queen of all promisers.  https://www.hillaryclinton.com/  Assessment:  Conservative values= 5, Leadership abilities= 1, Corruption by DC= -5

Add these all up and here are the rankings from worst to best:

1. Clinton= 1
2. Sanders=  6
3. O'Malley= 11
4. Trump = 14
5. Carson = 14
6. Christie= 14
7. Rubio = 14
8. Kasich= 15
9. Cruz= 16
10. Fiorina= 16
11. Bush= 18

Yes, the best candidate is again a Bush.  Read 'em and weep.  The best ticket would be Bush/Cruz.  The worse ticket would be Clinton/Anybody.

**note:  John Kasich was added later due to his late arrival to the race**

#10 The world belongs to the Maury Povich's.

Society has been ruined by many things.  Those in the media are probably tired of hearing this (except for the CEO's of media outlets who get the big bucks) but they are to blame for a lot of it. They sit back and create controversies when they aren't there, dilemmas when they aren't needed, and arguments that are left better to be unsaid.  It used to be that the media was there to tell the needed truth to keep people informed of injustices, allow people to understand the change of the world.  But it has been abused over time by becoming sources of gossip, trivial insignificance, petty circumstances, and even nauseating voyeurism.

It all started as joke.  People used to watch talk shows of pompous celebrities to the latest scoop on movies or events.  But that wasn't good enough.  We started to tune in to Oprah, Sally, Phil, and Geraldo.  We would tune in to see "Goats, and the women who love them".  We saw chairs being thrown.  Racial barriers were exemplified.  Weird traits, personal fetishes, inhuman subtleties, and circus side freak shows were exploited...and we were hooked.  But, even these have gone the way of the Dodo.  Today it's all about relationships and how they make us angry.  Jerry Springer became the new norm.  And to compete, Maury Povich had to change from a talk show to a scream show.

The problem is society is transforming into these shows.  We think the angrier we are the more people respect us.  We think the more insults we use the more people will laugh with us.  We think the louder we get the more people listen.  Ever noticed one thing?  Listen and silent have the same letters.

We live in a society where we don't want to listen anymore and get angry when people don't listen to us.  This breaks down society and breaks away the idea of a good democracy---controlled freedom. We have freedom of speech but we abuse it and that's not right.  Just because we have this freedom doesn't mean we have to use it all the time.  Take time to hear.  Take time to listen and you may be able to hear the real voices that are screaming out.

#9 Abortion is still wrong no matter how you spin it.

Yahoo, famous for their trivial, trying to start controversy, and mostly irrelevant articles posted this one yesterday:  Actress got abortion.

This article causes a little confusion to a conservative.  How is this about health care?  Was she sick? No.  Was the baby going to kill her?  No.  Was she raped?  No.  Or was it just going to put a damper on her economic situation?  Yes.  So, why should taxpayers pay for this through the ACA?  Her story is upsetting but for all the wrong reasons.  Her situation was tough.  Her decision could not have been an easy one when she got pregnant.  Her emotional state may have been compromised.  But this is not about "reproductive rights".  Her story should not be used as a flagship for law.  This is not PSA.  She was not a hero.  But that didn't stop Planned Parenthood.

"Insurance plans should cover abortion like other medical procedures, government programs should help low-income women who cannot afford abortion, and nonprofit groups that raise money to help women pay for abortion services should be fully funded,”--- Eric Ferrero, VP of communications for Planned Parenthood.

If she had her own insurance plan and she paid for it herself like any other "procedure" then maybe there wouldn't be such an issue but that is not what this was all about.  Ferrero's words aren't that bad from a legal standpoint.  Insurance plans should cover it if they want to, private insurance companies with their own policies that is.  Non-profit groups that are privately funded is okay as well.  However, other parts of people's insurance don't pay for even more expensive things like water damage to a basement which is not paid for by anyone but the policy holder due to it being an "act of God".  All of sudden there is a God under the law.  

But, there is another issue, a bigger picture, if you will.  What they fail to discuss are the other issues. What the fail to mention is the ethical and morality of the story.  Why was her pregnancy a shameful event?  Why couldn't she tell her mom?  Which part was she ashamed of?  Was it her pregnancy alone or the fact that she had sex outside of marriage?  The story is not consistent, nor ethical unless you base it on stupidity and liberalism.

She was an adult in college.  She was perfectly healthy when she and her boyfriend chose to have sex.  She used abortion to hide her actions.  She used this as a form of birth control because she knew her actions now had consequences.  But, it was too late; her baby was already a life form.

The link that is shared by the article is from  National Women's Law Center, State bans on abortion  And it claims that state bans on insurance coverage of abortion endanger women’s health and take health benefits away from women.  Since when does banning abortion endanger a woman's health?  The human race has been living for 6000 years and still thriving.  Health benefits?  Since when does banning abortions stop you from working out or taking vitamins?  What health benefits are they referring to?  Both of course have extreme cases that could be argued but only in rare cases and then exceptions may be applied as conservatives usually say.

Yes, her economic situation is not what she wanted.  But all of our actions have rewards and/or consequences.  If we all had abortions based on guilt or especially economics then the human race was doomed before it got started.  This is why the Affordable Care Act is wrong, it forces other people to pay for things that simply are not about medical issues but ethical issues.  And ethical issues also go on to hamper freedom of religion.

Point of this article was to push a liberal idea that abortion is okay.  In reality it is not.  Yes, abortion is legal.  Nothing right now can change it and maybe we shouldn't because that means more people will have unsafe back-alley abortions.  Nothing will change until we change the culture.  And that is what the real topic is about.  This young lady from this TV show was in an uncommitted relationship. Yes, they may even have loved each other but love is more than sex.  They were adults.  They knew how babies get here. They took the chance.  Even the girl knew something was wrong or otherwise she would never have been embarrassed, as an adult.  She tried to hide her actions and a life form paid for it.  The young woman should not be ostracized for her actions nor should any woman who has gone through similar situations.  But she should also not be used as model for getting laws passed or for younger woman to look up to.

Children used to be assets, now they are liabilities.  And we know what we want to do with liabilities...


Note:  the comments from AuntieChrist and the replies from me are taken from the comment section from Yahoo.

#8 All lives matter not just a few

This will be taken the wrong way by most.  Please see the big picture and not just talking points.

What is happening in Ferguson is perhaps one of the worse things that could possibly happen.  A new civil war is being fought but with the wrong undertones.  One sees it everywhere now; the sign that says black lives matter.  While there can be no argument there for any reason whatsoever, there is a missing point, all lives matter, not just a few.

This should never have been made out to be about racism unless, or at the least UNTIL facts came out that clearly could prove it.  While there may be racist police officers, of which there is no denying nor an excuse, we cannot automatically assume that every time someone who is arrested by someone of another color that it is because of racism.  We tend to forget that there are plenty of same color arrests and murders that go on in this country and we let them go because it is not news worthy or it will not wage enough anger for an excuse to go against order. 

Where are people like Al Sharpton when there are murders every year that are committed in so-called "black neighborhoods" yet no one is crying out foul?  Where are all the white "sympathizers" when white people kill other white people?  Neither is to be found until it is time for more hatred to be exploited.  Fact is 93% of black people are killed by other black people.  Fact is 85% of white people are killed by other white people (murder facts).  Yet, when a police officer is called to a scene and has to make a split second decision, and while the death toll numbers are very, very low compared to the rest of killings, these are the cases that are shown and turned into a topic that reopens civil war wounds.

This incident is a tragedy.  A young life was lost.  A family is broken.  But there was another sign that says "I have the right to speak" at some of these protests.  Of course you do, but what we do not have the right to do is committing crime, like the young man did right before the incident happened.  We all have to remember if the young man had not committed a crime then no police officer would have been called.  If the young man would have not resisted arrest the police officer would not have had to use force.  If the young man would not have charged at the police officer the police officer would not have felt the need to use deadly force.  We do not have the right to loot stores and businesses while we are "protesting".  We do not have the right to call for "dead cops".   Where is Al Sharpton on that subject?

Now we will have to see police officers being killed because those who want to carry the protests further will now wage war on them.  Within the next few weeks there will be many cases of police officers being targeted; watch and see.

All lives matter.  When will we wake up and realize that we live in this world together.  While racism is alive and well (may it die), the real problem is the whole human race itself and its narrow thinking and what it deems as rational thinking.  There is no more common sense in this country.

Note:  this post was debated on whether to be posted or not, but in light of recent events and hopes that no one will take this as a racist rant it was posted.  I do not believe in what people call neighborhoods that are white or black.