Resist: Display Your Flag Today

It is understandably easy to be overcome by America’s present situation. A leader who seems to think it is perfectly acceptable to change and ignore laws he doesn’t care for, even when they are his own laws (see Obamacare waiver for Obamacare requirement to implement business mandate by 2014 and unilateral declaration of war against Lybia). Add to that this leader’s cabinet members duly implementing their own agendas irregardless of what’s desired by or best for Americans (see EPA coal emissions regulations, Department of the Interior contempt of court denials of oil exploration leases, IRS stonewalling of discrimination discovery, Attorney General in contempt of Congress for stonewalling discovery in regards to Fast and Furious and Benghazi, etc).

In this climate, I have seen some people declare that they are not celebrating Independence Day this year. They will not be displaying their flag. That we are no longer America.

To those people I ask, “What is America?” Is it the lawless actions of a few privileged people? Or is it the unwavering spirit of freedom that cannot ever be destroyed, even if the society created to protect it is being shaken to its core?

Those who are whittling away at America as a beacon of freedom want nothing more than to see no flags today, to see evidence that they are breaking the American spirit, that our warriors have nothing left to fight for, that those who paid the ultimate price, did so in vain.

Well, I won’t let them have my spirit. I will fly my flag. I am not broken. I will resist.

To Die or Never to Live

A recent post on the Ace of Spades blog linked to an article at Legal Insurrection detailing a website where you can “out” former vegans. The website proclaims that “The spirits of the billions murdered have risen to deliver: The Vegan Sellout List – an online directory of those who have regressed from moral consistency to moral depravity.” The anti-meat crew apparently thinks that if people didn’t eat meat, wear leather, etc, there would be millions of cows and pigs roaming the landscape.

Allow me to blow your vegan minds:

If people didn’t eat meat, those cows and pigs would never have been born.

You see, livestock is grown for the purpose of consumption. If meat was never going to be eaten, the animals that provide the meat would never exist. There would be no cattle ranches, no pig farms, no chicken coops.

Sure there would be wild animals, but the “billions murdered” would never even exist.

So I have a question for the morally superior, evolved humans that call themselves vegan:

Is it better to live only to die, or never to live at all?

Who Wields the Axe

While running a few errands today I saw a bumper sticker that said I *Heart* Equality. Whenever I hear or see that sentiment I am reminded of the Rush song “The Forest,” which explores a scenario where smaller trees rebel against the oaks for being too tall and taking too much light. The song concludes with the lyric:

For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.

Equality is a fantasy. Even if we lived in a world where every single person was born with the same abilities and mental capacity, the geography of the planet will create unequal results. Are we going to bulldoze the entire planet? Drain the oceans? Flood the landscape? It’s complete stupidity.

The only way to achieve “equality” is to force everyone to the same level, to shove us all into the same mold. Equality through control. And therein lies the problem.

Since equality is not natural, it must be made. But who does the making?

In a world where all are equal,
there is still one above all,
the one who wields the axe.

And So We Weep

The emotion is overwhelming.

I’m working to build a dream, my own company, a thing I can call my own, while men in thousand dollar suits sit around planning how to crush it all. They eat filet for lunch while I have a cold cut sandwich and they have the gall to think they fight for the little man.

Our warriors are dying in strange places, trying to keep us safe. From what?! From those who mean us harm? Does it not harm us to have others tell us we don’t deserve what we have? That we must have it taken from us to be given to others? That we don’t deserve the freedom to protect ourselves, to defend our homes, to worship what we want to, and to speak freely?

Does it not harm us to have people deny IRS applications because they don’t like a name?

To leave soldiers to die because it wouldn’t be good for an election?

To have a reporter fraudulently called a criminal co-conspirator so you can spy on him?

What is happening to us? What is happening to me? What is happening to America?

I try to let it all pass me by, but it eats at my soul, hurts my heart.

Can it be stopped?

Will there be anything left?

And so we weep.

Off With Their Hands!

As we still find ourselves wading through anti-gun legislation, primarily at the state level at least for the moment, I thought it would be good to share my take on an interesting conversation I recently had with an anti-gun young man. He was quite confirmed in his belief that guns are stupid to have generally available and that they should be banned from public use. So I made the usual argument regarding gun bans and their lack of influence on criminal gun possession and use, effectively making the law abiding subject to the now physically more powerful criminal. He still stuck to his guns (see what I did there).

So rather than giving up the argument, I switched strategies. I conceded the gun ban angle and had us imagine a world without guns at all, none, zero. And I asked him if bad people would still exist in that world. Yes. And those bad people will still want to do bad things. Yes. And now that guns don’t exist, what do you think those bad people will use to do bad things? Sticks maybe?

So. Now guns are banned. No one has guns. But now bad people are beating people with big sticks so they can take their money. What should we do now?

Ban sticks.

Ban sticks?

Ok, let’s ban sticks. Tell you what, let’s ban everything. Nobody has anything. Do bad people still exist? Yes. And those bad people will still do bad things? Yes. And now that everything is banned, what will those bad people use to do bad things?

I put my hands in front of me and made two fists.

Give and Take

On April 8th I posted my thoughts following an exchange between my wife and a friend regarding Republican vs Democrat party affiliation where the Democrat supporter summarized her position along the lines of, “The government’s going to take my money anyway, and I’d rather support the party that gives some back to the poor.”

In my April 8th article, I countered that position by asking why giving someone money is so noble. It erodes self worth and fosters bitterness toward one’s own situation and resentment toward those who perpetuate that situation by subsidizing it.

But later I had another revelation about support of the party that claims to care, it’s one thing to vote to give and quite another to vote to take. I think if I were faced with this discussion, I would congratulate the Democrat supporter on their desire to give to those in need, but I would ask how they feel about people voting for Democrats because they get something out of the deal. They don’t cast that vote because they care. They cast it because they want. It’s an entirely different paradigm.

Then, faced with this perspective, I would ask the Democrat supporter if they’re as enthusiastic about a Democrat vote knowing that many Democrat supporters only do so because they are given things, not because of a moral high ground.

Further I would reiterate to the Democrat supporter that while they feel they are doing the right thing by voting to give to those who need, they are also voting to take from those who have. It’s one thing to give voluntarily and quite another to be forced to do so. The argument can be made that the people who don’t voluntarily give are morally inferior to those who do, but that doesn’t excuse giving license to the government to take.

It’s all about give. And take.

Minority Rules

Following last week’s Senate vote on the several gun control measures brought forward, Obama held a press conference in which he proceeded to throw a temper tantrum, lamenting how a “minority” of Senators aligned themselves with a minority of Americans to side with the gun lobby and vote down 7 of the 8 measures brought up for vote.

Obama made it clear that it wasn’t right that a minority with a minority view was able to overrule a majority. Well, if that’s the case I’ve got something to say to Mr. Obama:

You can take your Executive Orders and shove them.

If there is any more blatant example of a minority overruling a majority, it’s a unilateral declaration by a SINGLE PERSON that holds sway over an ENTIRE NATION.

If Obama wants to lecture us on why it’s unfair that a minority can overrule the will of the majority, I’d suggest he open the lecture with a primer on slavery, then segue into the history of the American Indian, and then finally to the issue of voting rights for women, before finally enlightening us about the merits of majority rule.

Mr. Obama, the reason it’s perfectly ok for a minority to overrule a majority is so society doesn’t degenerate into spoils for the many and misery for the few, and I’d suggest that you consider your own actions before decrying those of others. It’s crystal clear that you’re not at all concerned about the power of the minority over the majority, you’re only concerned that the minority votes the right way, your way.

Liberals: Neo-Imperialists

Much of the anti-American sentiment prevalent in liberal circles centers around “American imperialism.” Examples might include the westward expansion and plight of native American Indians, “nation building” e.g. “wars for oil,” and our history of military projection.

Regardless of where you lie in the debate over American imperialism, I doubt that anyone would say the proper counter to imperialism is more imperialism, yet that’s exactly what liberals do.

Let’s consider what imperialism is. Is it the taking over of an inhabited territory? Perhaps, but consider if a group of people physically overtake a territory, then realize they like the local culture more than their own. They discard their own culture and adopt that of the overtaken territory. Has the territory really been overtaken?

It can be argued then that the act of occupying a territory isn’t imperialism unless the occupiers enforce their own culture over that of the previous occupants. And that is why liberals can be characterized as “neo-imperialists.” Liberals don’t move into an area and adopt the local culture. Liberals don’t reside in an area and allow the culture to remain intact. They agitate for change. They expend effort into changing the culture to accept what they think is acceptable and reject that which is not acceptable.

I found this realization ironic, as the very characteristic that compels may liberals to believe counter to “traditional” American culture is a distaste for the “imperial” nature of American governmental action, yet they gladly embrace American imperialism when it sponsors their belief system. In a typical display of liberal hypocrisy, liberals are perfectly fine with government takeover of a culture, as long as the takeover reflects their values.

A Handful of Change

My wife had a conversation with a liberal the other day. They were discussing taxes. Interestingly, the liberal agreed that government takes too much of people’s money. But do you know how they rationalized their continued support of the Democrat party?

“The government’s going to take the money anyway, and I’d rather vote for the party that’s going to give some to the needy rather than the party that supports rich people.”

Yep. Even when they admit that the government takes too much, they placate themselves with the knowledge that at least it’s going to a good cause.

You know what I say? Why is it noble to take money from one person and give it to another? How are you ensuring that the money is improving things?

Welfare has become a way for people to abdicate personal responsibility. If they vote for politicians who support welfare, they can brag that “They care about others” or they’re “Doing their part” and “Doing the right thing.”

Nope. Sorry.

Unless you’re giving your own money or in the trenches with the people trying to help, you’re not doing anything but using your vote as a dismissal of guilt, the guilt you carry because you know you’re not really “Doing the right thing.” You’re doing nothing at all, just pontificating behind the assumption that other people are doing it for you.

How noble to claim that you care about the needy while authorizing politicians to steal on your behalf. Noble indeed. The very picture of moral superiority. And all the while people buy booze with their EBT cards, hang out on the street because they don’t have to work, and generally rot away because no one is there helping them to become human again.

You and your welfare vote can rot in the vacant stares of a million eyes who long for a better life and get nothing but a patronizing smile and a handful of change.

Uncomfortable In Their Own Skin

We went out last night to a trendy wine and tapas bar. Being a trendy wine and tapas bar there were many “hipsters” around. As I the evening progressed, I noticed something.

They all seemed uncomfortable.

Not uncomfortable as if their clothes were itchy or they didn’t like the way their seat felt, they looked awkward, nervous, finicky, glancing around, avoiding eye contact – uncomfortable.

Man and woman over there on the patio, deeply involved with whatever they needed to study on their MacBooks. Faces down, fingers hunting, glowing faces protected behind the aluminum shield with the apple shaped logo.

Younger couple at the table in front of us, initially excited about the band, now cramming their faces into their smartphones, not even reacting to the band struggling to tell jokes.

People standing in line at the bar, not acknowledging when the bartender asks what they want, struggling to make a decision, muffled conversations about previous bad food choices, no smiles, no “Excuse me,” just shuffling feet guided by eyes on the floor.

Every one of those people are liberal. I know they are. I heard the conversations about the vegan burger patties and working for non-profits.

And I realized something.

These people are not comfortable with who they are. Their identity is incredibly fragile. That’s why they cannot associate or accept anyone who opposes their worldview, they are afraid it would shatter theirs. In order for them to maintain their identity, they must surround themselves only with others who share their beliefs.

Being in a public place where they might be exposed to alternative viewpoints is horrifying. That’s why they flit from the door to the bar to the table. Entirely engaged with their group, no outward eye contact, no confident greeting of the stranger behind them in line.

Only once an unknown is defined as “friendly” will they engage in conversation. I was surprised by how pronounced this characteristic was.

What a shame to be uncomfortable in your own skin.