Being #NeverTrump Gave Me Super Powers!

IMG_2268Yes, you read the title right. Since I became #NeverTrump, I have the strength of three men! … Well, I actually have the voting power of three voters. Still not too shabby, but I guess I won’t be donning a mask and cape to fight crime; just to go to the odd comic book convention. See, it occurred to me that there is a funny little side effect to one of the major arguments that gets leveled against me by the Pro-Trump crowd. The argument is this:

“If you don’t support Donald Trump, that’s the same as voting for Hillary!”

This is a bad argument, of course. It’s false, dishonest and manipulative, but, for the moment, let’s give it more consideration than it actually deserves. I recently received a response to my writing on this subject in our local paper where I was told that my refusal to support either Trump nor Hillary was the same as me voting for Trump (obviously a Hillary supporter). We’ve all seen the meme:

IMG_2267

But I got to thinking about this. Trump supporters see that first statement as valid and true. But, if you employ logic when examining it, there is exactly the same amount of evidence and substance (namely, none) for that second claim as there is for the first, so let’s take a look at what that actually means:

First, every American who is eligible to vote for president (those who registered to vote, are not felons without restored voting rights, are 18 or older and are not dead…sorry about the last one, Democrats) has exactly one vote to cast. Are we agreed on that? Ok, good. (I’m assuming we all agree on that.)

Now, if not voting for Trump is a vote for Hillary, then it is equally true that not voting for Hillary is a vote for Trump. That means that, by not voting for either, I’m actually voting for both. That means I actually have the power to cast TWO VOTES; twice that of a normal voter!

Stay with me, people! We have one more leap to make here.

So, what happens if I vote for someone other than the “Big Two”? Let’s say I decide to vote for Gary Johnson or Darrell Castle or even write in Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio…or vote for Pikachu. (I know…he wasn’t born in America, so he’s not eligible, but everybody’s looking for him across America right now, so there’s that…) Now, I STILL haven’t voted for Trump or Hillary, so that’s the equivalent of voting for both, so I have effectively cast two votes…but I also cast a vote for someone else. In effect, I have cast THREE VOTES in one election! I have effectively become more powerful than any voter who votes for either Trump or Hillary. I have the power of three voters…and I didn’t have to get bit by a radioactive poll worker!

I figure by this point I should have some #NeverTrump people at least grinning…and I hope laughing. It’s true that this is all silliness, but there’s also a point here. You see, I figure any Trump supporter reading this has gotten really irritated and has maybe even started to change color a little. A least, I can hope they are. “This is ridiculous and unrealistic,” I imagine them grumbling…and they’d be right. It is ridiculous and unrealistic, but the importance is where it’s all ridiculous.

What I’ve used here is actually a debating technique called “Reductio ad absurdum”; latin for “reduction to absurdity”. The idea is simply to take a concept to its ultimate, and usually absurd, conclusion. But the truth is that it’s not the final extreme conclusion that my vote actually counts as three that’s absurd. That’s actually just a logical conclusion based on the original premise. This argument that not voting for ‘X’ is the same as voting for ‘Y’ is dishonest. Your vote is something of value to be spent, much like money, where you decide it should go. Have you ever told someone that, if they don’t spend their money to buy a Bible, that’s the same as spending their money to buy porn? Of course you don’t, because it’d be absurd…and so, is this statement about voting. However you choose to use your vote, it’d doesn’t have a list of side-effects connected to it likes Cialis commercial.

So, if it’s such a bad argument, why do the Trump people keep going back to it like a touchstone? Do they not realize that it’s a flawed argument? Many don’t. For them, it was used to manipulate them and now they embrace it as gospel and use it against others. But there are those who know it’s dishonest and don’t care. For them, if it gets people to go along with their agenda, then the truth be damned.

Of course, if that isn’t quite enough to get people in line, they’ll amp it up a little and, when you continue to refuse to support Trump, they’ll just accuse you of actually being a Hillary supporter or even a closeted liberal. Sound familiar? It’s the same thing the left has been doing for decades, except their accusation of choice is to call us racists, but the purpose is exactly the same in both cases; to force people to do what they want them to regardless of their convictions or principles or even any concept of right and wrong.

This actually comes from Saul Alinski’s 12th Rule for Radicals: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Basically, embarrass, vilify and shame those who stand in your way…until they don’t stand in your way anymore. Yes, I’m saying that there are those who call themselves conservatives who are acting in accordance with the teachings of Alinski. The practices of the left are virulent and, when we play with them, we run a huge risk of getting infected with something we REALLY don’t want.

But that’s a subject for another day. I only bring it up to reinforce the point that this argument that not voting for Trump is the same as a vote for Hillary comes from a very dark, dishonorable, dishonest place. It has no validity and it’s only purpose is to bully you into doing something, no matter what your heart is telling you is right.

The next time someone tries to bully you this way, consider trying this: Do your best Star Wars Obi-Wan Kenobi voice (Sir Alec Guinness…he was way cooler), smile and say, “If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.” These people won’t get the humor in it; they have no sense of humor when it comes to their spray-tanned messiah. I can also pretty well guarantee they won’t get the pop culture reference and it’s always fun to watch people like that flounder trying to make sense out of such a nerdy reference!

TAKE ACTION TO SAVE AMERICAN JOBS AND U.S. SOVEREIGNTY: STOP OBAMA’S TPA/TPP/FAST-TRACK

WE CAN STOP OBAMA FROM DESTROYING AMERICAN JOBS AND SURRENDERING U.S. SOVEREIGNTY — ACT NOW WITH ONE CLICK (BELOW)

Take 1 minute to fill out a short form and click — or instantly get your House rep’s phone number and talking points. Letter text is already there and your message will be automatically routed to your senators and House rep. You can customize the text all you want or write your own letter. I’ve provided multiple links so you can pick and choose which organization’s form to use. There is very broad opposition to TPP/TPA/fast-track (Trans-Pacific Partnership/Trade Promotion Authority) spanning the political spectrum. This is a chance for good American citizens of all stripes to come together and do the right thing.

Do you want to let President Obama sign a “largely secret” [1] trade deal that will eliminate “millions of good jobs,” [2] give “the President More Power,” [3], increase “Trade Deficits,” [3], surrender American sovereignty, [3] allow “currency manipulation,” [3] and allow increased immigration [3] (ON TOP OF OBAMA’S AMNESTIES)? Many polls confirm Americans’ strong opposition to TPA/TPP, [4][5][6] and some House Republicans are taking note. [7]

“The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a sweeping international regulatory agreement that effects everything from the environment and energy to the minimum wage, food and immigration. If approved, it would have the force of a treaty. Its regulations would override U.S. law and the White House would not be obligated to follow any directives Congress offers on what those rules should look like.” [1]

ACT NOW WITH ONE CLICK

Fill in your info and click the orange “ADD YOUR NAME” button by clicking this link (350.org)

Scroll down and click on the red “Take Action” button (you’ll be prompted for your zip code and then provided with your House rep’s phone number and talking points/script by clicking this link (Eagle Forum)

Enter your zip code and press the “Submit” button by clicking this link (Citizens Trade Campaign)

Scroll down to “Compose Your Own Message,” enter your zip code, and click the “Submit” button by using this link (Consumer Action)

Continue reading

ACTION CALL: STOP OBAMA’S AMNESTY AND STRENGTHEN IMMIGRATION LAWS

Look up, call, and email your senators: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm (or call 202-224-3121 – the Capitol Switchboard – and ask for your senators)

Here are talking points:

  • Please tell your senator to vote YES on Vitter amendments #849 and #850 to the Budget Resolution. These amendments would express the sense of Congress to end the outdated practice of Birthright Citizenship and to defund Pres. Obama’s 2014 unconstitutional amnesties.
  • Please tell your senator to vote NO on Hatch amendment #646 that would instruct Congress to increase the number of foreign tech workers.
  • Please tell your senator to vote YES on Grassley amendments #960 and #958 that instructs Congress to pass legislation that makes E-Verify mandatory and protects American workers before companies can petition for H-1B visas.

Time to chide Republicans who BETRAYED us and funded Obama’s executive amnesty

It is imperative that you contact Republican senators and representatives and their “leaders,” Mitch Mcconnell and John Boehner, who betrayed conservatives (people with common sense) and funded President Obama’s executive amnesty. Tell them to abide by conservative principles, you know what they did, you’re watching, and you’ll vote based on their actions. All their names and contact info is provided below. Please share this information widely so we can expose these deceivers. They must know that voters are watching them and will publicize their deception. The fact is that House Speaker John Boehner, and later Senate Majority Leader Mitch Mcconnell, planned the whole “defunding” of Obama’s executive amnesty to fail from the start. A key promise made by Republicans during campaigning for the November 4, 2014 elections was to stop executive amnesty for at least 5 million illegals. From Breitbart:

Exclusive-Priebus Rallies Base: GOP Will Stop Obama’s ‘Un-American’ Amnesty if We Win Senate

Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), says it’s “un-American” for President Barack Obama to consider implementing an executive amnesty for millions of illegal aliens across the country.

“It’s unconstitutional, illegal, and we don’t support it,” Priebus replied when a Tea Party activist asked him about the president’s plans for an executive amnesty on a conference call hosted by TheTeaParty.net on Monday evening.

“I don’t support it. It is wrong,” Priebus said. “It is un-American for a president to try and do such a thing. I want to make it clear: There is no part of me, there is not a molecule in my body that agrees with the president on executive amnesty.” …

By attaching defunding provisions to a massive $39.7 billion Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, Republicans gave Democrats the political ammunition to cry fowl — screaming along the lines of “You’d sacrifice the security of the American people over some extreme right-wing amendment?” These Democrats and their Republican collaborators “forgot” the fact that executive amnesty is unconstitutional, illegal, and was blocked by a federal court. It gets worse. A very prominent Republican is deliberately trying to tear apart his own party:

… Rep. Peter T. King, one of the Republicans most critical of some in his own party, called the hard-liners “self-righteous and delusional.” …

It gets even worse according to the Senate Conservatives Fund:

… A political group with close ties to the House Republican leadership just launched new TV ads attacking three conservative congressmen for refusing to fund President Obama’s illegal executive amnesty. …

Why this betrayal by the GOP? Republicans took the Senate, strengthened their hold on the House, took a good number of state houses, and won an amazing number of governorships, but voters weren’t solely endorsing the GOP — not by a long-shot. Voters were more concentrated on repudiating President Obama’s policies and those of his out-of-control “liberal” establishment. The GOP had a mandate to oppose Obama, and poll after poll after poll shows Americans oppose amnesty for illegals (see here and here), yet they’re already squandering their political capital. They’re afraid. They think they need to “compromise” and be “moderate,” but all they’ll accomplish is splitting the GOP and/or guaranteeing they’ll lose the next election.

To be fair, there was some good news, from the Senate Conservatives Fund:

… A majority of Republicans in the House and Senate voted against their leaders and opposed funding for executive amnesty.

In the House, 167 Republicans (68%) opposed it, and in the Senate, 31 Republicans (57%) opposed it. It’s a reversal from December when a majority of Republicans supported the cromnibus spending bill that also funded amnesty.

This is a big shift and it would not have happened without all of the petitions signed and calls made by people like you across the country.

It’s a clear rebuke of the decision by Senator McConnell and Speaker Boehner to surrender the power of the purse….

Note that I highlighted the point about people engaging in the political process: It does work.

It would help to thank those Republicans who stood for conservative principles. You can find out who they are by clicking here and use the links below to find their names and show your appreciation (note: Republicans are shown in a normal font, Democrats in italic, and Independents are underlined). But we need to remind the sellouts — now.

First, contact GOP leadership and tell them you know what they did, you’re watching, and you’ll vote based on their actions:

Look up and contact the senators listed below who betrayed conservative principles — and Nov. 4, 2014 election promises — by clicking here. Call them, email them, snail-mail them, fax them, and tell them you know what they did, you’re watching, and you’ll vote based on their actions:

22 Senate Republicans
AK Lisa Murkowski
AZ John McCain
AZ Jeff Flake
CO Cory Gardner
IL Mark Kirk
IN Daniel Coats
KY Mitch McConnell
ME Susan Collins
MS Thad Cochran
NH Kelly Ayotte
NV Dean Heller
SC Lindsey Graham
SD Mike Rounds
SD John Thune
TN Lamar Alexander
TN Bob Corker
TX John Cornyn
UT Orrin Hatch
WI Ron Johnson
WY Michael Enzi
WY John Barrasso

Look up and contact the representatives listed below who betrayed conservative principles — and Nov. 4, 2014 election promises — by clicking here. Call them, email them, snail-mail them, fax them, and tell them you know what they did, you’re watching, and you’ll vote based on their actions:

75 House Republicans
AZ Martha McSally
CA Ken Calvert
CA Jeff Denham
CA Steve Knight
CA Kevin McCarthy
CA Devin Nunes
CA Edward Royce
CA David Valadao
CA Mimi Walters
CO Mike Coffman
FL Vern Buchanan
FL Carlos Curbelo
FL Mario Diaz-Balart
FL David Jolly
FL Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
ID Michael Simpson
IL Mike Bost
IL Rodney Davis
IL Bob Dold
IL Adam Kinzinger
IL Aaron Schock
IL John Shimkus
IN Susan Brooks
IN Todd Young
KY Harold Rogers
LA Steve Scalise
ME Bruce Poliquin
MI Dan Benishek
MI Mike Bishop
MI Candice Miller
MI John Moolenaar
MI Dave Trott
MI Fred Upton
MN Tom Emmer
MN John Kline
MN Erik Paulsen
NC Renee Ellmers
NC Patrick McHenry
NC Robert Pittenger
NH Frank Guinta
NJ Rodney Frelinghuysen
NJ Leonard Lance
NJ Frank LoBiondo
NJ Tom MacArthur
NJ Christopher Smith
NV Cresent Hardy
NV Joseph Heck
NY Chris Collins
NY Christopher Gibson
NY Richard Hanna
NY John Katko
NY Peter King
NY Elise Stefanik
OH John Boehner
OH Steve Stivers
OH Patrick Tiberi
OH Michael Turner
OK Tom Cole
OR Greg Walden
PA Ryan Costello
PA Charles Dent
PA Michael Fitzpatrick
PA Patrick Meehan
PA Tim Murphy
PA Joseph Pitts
PA Glenn Thompson
SD Kristi Noem
TX John Carter
TX Kay Granger
TX Will Hurd
TX Michael McCaul
VA Barbara Comstock
WA Cathy McMorris Rodgers
WA David Reichert
WI Paul Ryan

Please don’t think you’re wasting your time. These legislators know that people who take the time to contact them are extremely likely to vote, vote on principle, and to throw out unprincipled legislators as fast as they were voted in. Please act now.

New Mexico – Bringing the power home: One click sends an email to 13 legislators calling for a convention of states under Article V of the U.S. Constitution

Click here to send an email to 13 New Mexico legislators calling for a convention of states under Article V of the U.S. Constitution. The resolution’s text explains why we need to reign in the power of the federal government:

    WHEREAS, the Founders of our Constitution empowered State Legislators to be guardians of liberty against future abuses of power by the federal government; and

    WHEREAS, the federal government has created a crushing national debt through improper and imprudent spending; and

    WHEREAS, the federal government has invaded the legitimate roles of the states through the manipulative process of federal mandates, most of which are unfunded to a great extent; and

    WHEREAS, the federal government has ceased to live under a proper interpretation of the Constitution of the United States; and

    WHEREAS, it is the solemn duty of the States to protect the liberty of our people, particularly for the generations to come, by preparing Amendments to the Constitution of the United States through a Convention of the States under Article V to place clear restraints on these and related abuses of power;

    NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO that the legislature of New Mexico hereby applies to Congress, under the provisions of Article V of the Constitution of the United States, for the calling of a convention of the states limited to proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government and limit the terms of office for its officials and for Members of Congress; and

    BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the New Mexico secretary of state is hereby directed to transmit copies of this application to the President and Secretary of the United States Senate and to the Speaker and Clerk of the United States House of Representatives, and copies to the members of the Senate and House of Representatives from this State; also to transmit copies to the presiding officers of each of the legislative houses in the several States, requesting their cooperation; and

    BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this application constitute a continuing application in accordance with Article V of the Constitution of the United States until the legislatures of at least two-thirds of the several states have made applications on the same subject.

DEFUNDING OBAMA’S AMNESTY: Litmus test for Republicans – true conservatives standing on principle?

Republican leadership seems on the verge of caving in, breaking their November 4, 2014 election promises, and funding President Obama’s blatantly unconstitutional executive directives to grant amnesty to approximately 5 million illegal immigrants. Did Republicans get the message voters sent in the November 4 election? Republicans took the Senate, strengthened their hold on the House, took a good number of state houses, and won an amazing number of governorships, but voters weren’t solely endorsing the GOP — not by a long-shot. Voters were more concentrated on repudiating President Obama’s policies and those of his out-of-control “liberal” establishment. But, before dissecting the intentions of GOP leaders (and many in the rank and file), PLEASE ACT NOW TO STOP OBAMA’S UNCONSTITUTIONAL EXECUTIVE AMNESTY:

Talking points to use when contacting senators
I urge you to oppose President Obama’s executive amnesty for illegal aliens because:

  • Pres. Obama’s executive amnesties are unconstitutional
  • A federal judge has temporarily blocked Obama’s executive amnesty, proving that that the president’s actions are illegal
  • Amnesty encourages and rewards illegal activity
  • Amnesty steals jobs from American workers whom already are suffering because illegals are taking their jobs
  • Amnesty forces wages down for already-struggling American workers
  • With amnesty, illegal aliens will more easily be able to vote in elections
  • Obama’s amnesty will force hard-working Americans to PAY illegals millions of dollars in free handouts

Why are Republicans so convinced that they must “compromise” on amnesty? From Breitbart:

Though establishment Republican leaders and the mainstream press–without any evidence–incessantly claim Republicans must cave on immigration enforcement to appeal to Hispanics, a majority of Hispanics actually want Congress to pass legislation making it tougher for businesses to illegally hire illegal immigrants. …

Americans in general, by a 50-point margin, wanted tougher rules against hiring illegal immigrants, and that included a majority of Hispanics (56% to 37%).

Are a bunch of Republicans simply pandering to the business lobby, looking for cheap labor and/or looking to fill positions in sectors like tech in which there’s a deficit of qualified workers (e.g., mobile app developers)? But who cares? Amnesty is not what American voters want as evidenced by many polls and the outcome of the November 4 election. The bottom line is that Republicans — especially their “leadership” — have broken promises they made in the run-up to the November 4 election. So is this just about getting re-elected? — because it sure looks like citizens are more likely to vote for politicians who oppose amnesty. Again, from Breitbart:

Exclusive-Priebus Rallies Base: GOP Will Stop Obama’s ‘Un-American’ Amnesty if We Win Senate

Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), says it’s “un-American” for President Barack Obama to consider implementing an executive amnesty for millions of illegal aliens across the country.

“It’s unconstitutional, illegal, and we don’t support it,” Priebus replied when a Tea Party activist asked him about the president’s plans for an executive amnesty on a conference call hosted by TheTeaParty.net on Monday evening.

“I don’t support it. It is wrong,” Priebus said. “It is un-American for a president to try and do such a thing. I want to make it clear: There is no part of me, there is not a molecule in my body that agrees with the president on executive amnesty.” …

“Not a molecule,” huh? So why did this happen yesterday?

… Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced at a press conference Tuesday he is willing to allow a vote on a so-called “clean” DHS bill that would fund the agency through the end of September prior to a vote planned for Friday on blocking President Barack Obama’s executive orders on immigration. …

“Clean” means funding Obama’s amnesty. McConnell is not standing on principle, everything’s political calculus for staying in office.

No matter. We only got to this sorry state of affairs because millions of Americans have been disengaged from the political process.

I guarantee you this: If senators get thousands of calls, emails, faxes, petitions, letters, tweets, etc., they’ll start getting more responsive to voters. They know that people who take the time to contact them are extremely likely to vote, vote on principle, and to throw out unprincipled legislators as fast as they were voted in. Please act now.

Amnesty for illegals can only be defunded if YOU ACT NOW

You can act now to stop President Obama’s executive amnesty for illegal aliens using the tools provided below. Please act soon as “On Tuesday [Feb. 3], the [Senate] chamber will hold its first procedural vote on the House-passed version of the DHS [Department of Homeland Security] funding bill, H.R.240,” [1] a bill which defunds Obama’s executive amnesty.

President Obama has announced that “he is granting temporary legal status and work permits to nearly 5 million illegal immigrants” by executive fiat — without approval from Congress and ignoring the will of the American people. The effects of such an unconstitutional action would be horrendous, for example, causing U.S. citizens who are already unemployed or underemployed to have an extremely hard time finding already-scarce employment opportunities — especially in border states like New Mexico.

Despite two polls released on January 25 and 29 showing a clear majority of Americans either are totally opposed (58%) to Obama’s executive action(s) or are “dissatisfied with current level[s] of immigration” (60%), there’s no guarantee that Senate Republicans will vote to defund Obama’s executive amnesty. To add insult to injury, Obama’s current nominee for Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, believes that “illegal aliens have the same right to work in America as American citizens do.” That’s where you come in.


ACT NOW

  1. Look up your two senators and their contact info by clicking this link and picking from the “Choose a State” drop-down (the page will open in a separate window)
  2. Use the contact info you just found to call, email, and/or fax your two senators telling them to vote for defunding of President Obama’s executive amnesty, and to vote to support H.R.240
  3. Sign the petition to your two U.S. Senators demanding that Attorney General nominee Loretta Lynch pledge to protect American workers by enforcing immigration laws passed by Congress

Footnotes

[1] “Senate debate on funding Obama’s amnesty starts next week,” email from NumbersUSA, Fri 1/30/2015 4:13 PM.

Thoughts On The Movie, Selma

Martin-Luther-King-JrThis weekend, I watched the new movie, Selma. Oprah Winfrey, a notoriously close-minded liberal with a willingness to throw the race card almost as much as the likes of Al Sharpton, was heavily involved in making this movie, so I was a little concerned about what I was going to see.
Surprisingly though, Selma is much more accurate than I ever expected. The historical inaccuracies are relatively minor and most are easily overlooked. I was disappointed that there was no mention of A.D. King, Dr. King’s younger brother (and father of Dr. Alveda King), who was also present in Selma. I was a little disappointed, but not terribly surprised. After all, I’d be willing to bet good money that there wasn’t a single conservative involved in the creation of this movie. Just the subject matter alone is enough to raise some very uncomfortable issues for Democrats when dealing with racial issues in America in a factual way. After all. It’s pretty hard to avoid the fact that the racist politicians and lawmen who obstructed, intimidated, brutalized and even murdered those who were demanding the liberties we are all endowed with, were all, without a single exception, Democrats: Bull Conner, Wilson Baker, George Wallace and even J. Edgar Hoover. Including the father of one of today’s influential and passionate black women, a Christian minister, pro-life activist and, yes, conservative Republican, probably hit a little too close to home for them. There were only actually two things about this movie I wanted to address.

LYNDON JOHNSON AS A RACIST
Speaking of shortcomings in our education system, one of the first things I heard about Selma that piqued my interest, was from some very offended liberals. Beside the fact that liberals have a default setting of being offended most of the time, this caught my attention because they were upset at how ‘historically inaccurate’ the movie is because it portrays President Lyndon Johnson as a…gasp…racist! To be clear, Johnson was absolutely a racist. Yes, he did support and sign the Civil Rights Act of 1957 (the bill he referred to as “the n*gg*r bill”), but only after dragging his feet and opposing it. In 1948, then Senator Johnson said, regarding the civil rights efforts during the Truman administration that it, “is a farce and a sham–an effort to set up a police state in the guise of liberty. I am opposed to that program. I have voted against the so-called poll tax repeal bill … I have voted against the so-called anti-lynching bill.” I assume that, for a man like Johnson, it was very important to protect the practices of poll taxes and lynchings. He fought against Eisenhower’s 1957 civil rights bill, ultimately using his position and power in the Senate to gut the bill of all its enforcement powers. He also fought against the 1960 Civil Rights Act. Johnson kept company with many like-minded racists in the Democrat Party but, unlike most of them, he came to understand the potential political power of a voting black populace and decided to attempt to rewrite his own history to make it look like he was the type of man who embraced what he’d actually been fighting against his whole life. A line from the PBS special, LBJ, says, “But the real measure of a leader is what he gets done, the size of the problems he faces. Before Lyndon Johnson, we were essentially a segregated society.” The thing is, if Johnson had his way, we would still be segregated today. It’s true that you measure a leader by what he gets done, but make no mistake. Johnson was not the leader to ‘get done’ anything to further the cause of Civil Rights in America; he was simply dragged along against his will in the wake of the real leaders of the time; people like Martin Luther King, Jr., A.D. King, John Lewis, Hosea Williams, James Orange, Roy Innis, A. Phillip Randolph, and Bayard Rustin, among so many others. These were the people who effected positive change in spite of the opposition of men like Lyndon Johnson. It’s sad that so many have since been conned into mistaking Johnson’s political expediency for any sort of change of heart or, even worse, have just blindly bought into the narrative of the man as some kind of Civil Rights hero because the media and other voices on the left say it’s so.

ATTEMPTS AT POLITICAL REPOSITIONING
The second thing that struck me came straight from the movie itself. While I wasn’t particularly surprised, it was disturbing to hear the words ‘progressive’ (used once) and ‘liberal’ (used twice) to describe the people who were inclined to support the Civil Rights Movement and the efforts of Dr. King. While it is true that the progressive movement wasn’t terribly advanced or high profile yet and the term ‘liberal’ was only beginning to be taken and twisted by the left, it’s clear what the subtle message that the movie makers are trying to get across is: that it was those evil Republicans who wanted to keep the black man down and the ones who could be rallied to stand against that racism were the Democrats. Of course, they had to make this message subtle for the simple reason that it’s an outright lie. Every single name mentioned in Selma as an enemy of equality was a devoted Democrat. It was the religious leaders that Dr. King called on for support, the majority of whom, at least those who were affiliated, were Republicans and definitely conservative, much like Dr. King himself. It was Republicans, both black and white, who were standing beside these activists across the nation, often losing their lives in the process, too. It was the NRA that was created specifically in order to arm and train black Americans so that they had a chance of defending themselves against those who immersed themselves in racial hatred, especially in the form of the Democrat sponsored, funded and manned Ku Klux Klan.
And, yes, I’m already hearing this nonsense starting to resurface about how there was this great party switch and the Republicans of then are now the Democrats of today. That’s always been a lie and always will be. To this day, the only example anyone can point to of a Democrat of that time becoming a Republican is Strom Thurmond. The thing is, Thurmond had a major change of heart and deed and turned his back on his racist practices and words. Of course he had to leave the Democrat Party. To do otherwise would’ve been like someone turning vegan but staying a member of the steak of the month club. (I assume something like that exists because, if it doesn’t, then it really, really should!) Here’s just a handful of Democrats (this article would be HUGE if I put all of them in) who were opposed to civil rights and equality for blacks who never made a single move to leave the Democrat Party: Orval Fabus, Bull Conner, Benjamin Travis Laney, John Stennis, James Eastland, Allen Ellender, Russell Long, John Sparkman, John McClellan, Richard Russell, Herman Talmadge, George Wallace, Lester Maddox, John Rarick, Robert Byrd (Bill Clinton’s good friend) and Al Gore, Sr. (his son invented the Internet).
The truth is, the place where those who wallow in racism or victimization or a desire to imprison people, be it in chains of iron or the more deceptive chains of entitlement and dependency, feel the most comfortable is the Democrat Party. That has never changed from Day One. The only things that have changed are the words they subvert to describe themselves and the increasing sophistication of the shell game they play to fool so many people.

BACK TO THE MOVIE
Believe it or not, in spite of the time I took addressing these two factors, they’re actually pretty minimal problems in regard to this movie. Selma is a movie I’d really encourage people to see. I really like the way it portrays Martin Luther King Jr.; as a man who is, like the rest of us, flawed and at times unsure, but who follows his conscience and commits himself to promoting what is right and standing against what is wrong. He sets a standard in those ways that is worthy of emulation and it is an example that so many members of the modern Republican Party would do well to take to heart before we completely lose our way. I found myself crying at the sight of people’s capacity for cruelty towards others and my heart swelled with pride at those who answered the call to oppose such overwhelming hatred and violence. While I’m used to the sort of biased tripe that Oprah Winfrey and other Hollywood liberals put out, like that train wreck of a movie (but not the book), The Butler, I do have to give credit where credit is due. Other than a couple of minor attempts to alter the political reality of our history, this movie is very well done and worth the time to watch.
Next time, I’ll be talking about how the new Dumb and Dumber movie is a direct parallel to the Democrat National Convention. Well, probably not, but you never know!

Stand up and reject the entitlement mentality

There are plenty of fundamental problems in our society that desperately need to be fixed. One of the major issues facing us is this pervasive entitlement mentality that has been eating away at our character as a people, constantly making us weaker and weaker…and less American. The most recent and local example of this is the minimum wage initiative by NMCAFe here in southern New Mexico.

In spite of the Las Cruces City Council putting forth a reasonable compromise of an increased minimum wage of $8.50/hour (something that made no one really happy, but something everyone could live with), NMCAFe plugged their ears and shut their eyes and pushed forward to get the $10.10/hour increase they wanted, no matter what the concerns of others might be or who might get hurt in the process (including those they claim to want to help). It’s this attitude of “I deserve” and “I’m owed” that’s allowed that kind of behavior to be tolerated and even embraced. So many people on both sides have failed to do what used to be the norm in America: telling those like NMCAFe Director, Sara Nolan, to grow up and learn how to work with others for something beyond their personal wants.

It’s not just a left-wing thing, either. We had a Republican running for Senate this past year, Allen Weh, who was just as guilty of wallowing in an entitlement mentality. He decided that, because of who he was, what he’d done in his past and the station in society he now holds, that he simply deserved to be elected and everyone who considered themselves conservative should just fall in line and support him blindly. Unfortunately for him, there are way too many people on the right who are fed up with being treated that way. Add to that the fact that he blatantly alienated large numbers of grass roots-oriented conservatives while making absolutely no effort to connect with conservative Democrats (Yes, there are a lot of those in New Mexico.). His run was a spectacular failure as large numbers of voters simply stayed away from the polls altogether and a huge block who did vote, withheld their votes from him. Yet, we have so many who demand the allegiance of voters simply because of the letter beside their names and the candidates names. Like expecting workers who want higher pay to be willing to put out the effort to earn it, we need to start demanding that our candidates and officials do something to actually earn our votes and our support, too.

Our nation is founded on the principle that we’re all created equal, not that equality needs to be imposed upon us throughout our lives and definitely not that those who earn more need to be forcibly brought down to a lower level out of some twisted sense of fairness and not that we need to be told to shut up and show ‘gratitude’ or ‘loyalty’ to those who claim to know so much more than we do and who claim to be looking out for our wellbeing. We need to stop acting like victims and giving our power away and embrace individual responsibility again…in ourselves and those around us.

After all, equality doesn’t need to be imposed, only defended against those who would directly attack it or twist, diminish and pervert it under the guise of empowerment and doing away with perceived inequalities (like the false narrative about the so-called income inequality). We need to return to the idea that, if we want something, then we should put out the effort to get it. If we’re not willing to do what it takes, then it’s obviously not important enough to us. Handing people what they haven’t earned is like rewarding a child who has behaved badly. In that kind of an environment, there should be no surprise when that child continues to behave badly, just as there should be no surprise when those being given higher wages or benefits or even votes under the guise of ‘equality’ or ‘loyalty’ or ‘a lesser of two evils’, regardless of effort, show no desire to excel or put out extra effort to earn what they want.

In small increments, kind of like putting a frog into cold water and then slowly heating it up, we’ve accepted so much of this sort of entitlement thinking as a part of modern life and it becomes more vitally important every day that we wake up and jump out of that pot while we’re still capable as a society of embracing personal responsibility and excelling in the process.

New Voter ID Law Passes in Hobbs, New Mexico

voter id ballot hobbsVoters in Hobbs New Mexico today voted to approve a measure that would require identification  to be presented in order to vote in municipal elections. The vote was decisive with 78% of voters in favor of the measure in spite of efforts by opposition, including the NAACP. B.J. Choice Sr., a member of the NAACP and Hobbs resident, said, “It’s an effort, in my opinion, to suppress people coming to the polls.” He said the legislation is like “the poll tax and the literacy test that minorities and poor whites had to go through.” Opponents, including Choice, have also compared it to the Jim Crow laws and say that groups like African Americans, Latinos and the elderly will have a harder time obtaining photo IDs in order to vote.
Just for the record, poll taxes were instituted by Democrats to require that voters pay in order to register to vote…unless their father or grandfather had been registered previously. This specifically targeted blacks, whose fathers and grandfathers had generally been slaves with no right to vote, while whites were much more likely to qualify to have the poll tax waived. The same thing with the literacy tests; they were designed to exclude blacks, who had a much higher rate of illiteracy than whites and could be disqualified even if they were literate. As an example, in Alabama, blacks were asked to answer questions such as: name all 67 county judges in the state, name the date when Oklahoma was admitted to the Union, and how many bubbles are in a bar of soap. Jim Crow laws, also passed by southern Democrats, established the concept of “separate but equal” and severely disenfranchised and limited the civil liberties of blacks.
By contrast, this voter ID law requires every voter to present an ID, proving that they are who they say they are. That’s all. Among other things, you must have a valid photo ID to:
  • buy cigarettes, alcohol or an “M” rated video game
  • open a bank account
  • apply for a mortgage, Medicaid, Social Security, unemployment or government assistance including public health insurance (ie. Obamacare)
  • drive, buy or rent a car
  • get on an airplane
  • get married
  • adopt a pet
  • rent a hotel room
  • apply for a hunting or fishing license
  • pick up prescriptions
  • donate blood
  • get a job
  • cash a check
  • or even get a library card.
While they haven’t been vocal about these requirements for ID, Civil rights groups like the NAACP argue that voter ID laws target blacks, latinos, senior citizens and the poor by unduly restricting voting and imposing unnecessary costs. However, anyone who can prove who they are and that they are legally authorized to vote, gets to vote. The new legislation also ads that, if voters don’t have identification, the city will provide it for no charge. So, apparently, the NAACP believes that blacks, latinos, seniors and the poor are either too stupid to go down and ask for an ID, pose for a picture, or follow the same rules as everyone else or they believe that they’re too poor to afford a free ID. Or it could just be that the they’re using this issue to further promote class warfare and racial division and score political points on an issue that has nothing to do with race or class. It’s not like they have a reputation for pulling those kinds of stunts, right?
Even at the state level right now, any citizen can acquire an ID by providing 1) a document of their identity (birth certificate, U.S. passport, military ID, etc.), 2) a document proving their identification number (Social Security card), 3) two documents proving New Mexico residency (rental or mortgage agreement, utility bills, bank statement, etc.) and 4) a thumbprint and signature. It then costs $10 for four years or $18 for eight years. Citizens who are 75 or older get the ID free. That’s not what I’d call restrictive requirements. It is nothing more than establishing the identity of those the state is providing proof of and I pay more for my gym membership than either $10 or $18 a year (not to mention what I pay for my drivers license).
Secretary of State Dianna Duran has called the Hobbs special election encouraging and said that she will again push state lawmakers to consider a voter ID law. If that were to happen, such legislation would very likely include making those state IDs available at no charge, as well.
Hobbs is also not the first city in New Mexico to pass a voter ID law. Albuquerque and Rio Rancho also require photo ID for local elections. We currently have 34 states with laws requiring voters to show identification at the polls. The Hobbs vote is not an isolated incident and these laws are not designed to keep anyone from the polls…other than those who are attempting to perpetrate fraud on our election process. The voting rights of those who actually have the right to vote will be protected through these laws. The ones who are not registered to vote, who have had their right to vote revoked through Due Process, who try to vote under someone else’s name or who are simply not residents or even citizens? They have no right to vote anyway, nor should they, so there are no rights there to protect.
Congratulations to Hobbs, New Mexico on passing a voter ID law and may the rest of us come to our senses and follow your example soon.