Tag: politics

Great Sayings – JFK on Lying

“For the great enemy of truth is very often not the lie–deliberate, contrived and dishonest–but the myth–persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”

President John F. Kennedy, Yale University Commencement, June 11, 1962

It’s hard to know what to believe these days.  The media (MSM) lies to us every time they communicate, politicians say what they think others want to hear (there are a rare few that don’t) and Social Media is just a group lynching now for whatever you say that more than 1 other person disagrees.  Worst of all are the celebtards who think they have a clue to what life is really about and get together to preach to the masses because they have a million Instagram followers.

The bottom line is if you don’t believe in something, you will fall for anything.  For me it is faith, but everyone has to find their own way and their own rock to anchor to.  Good luck.

If everyone starts repeating the same thing, use your critical thinking to decide whether it is worth going along with or if it is even true.  I question just about everything until I know the motive.  Also, I quit Twitter, Quora and only look at FAKEbook for group events that I’m supposed to show up at.

Great Sayings – Advertising vs. The News (both suck)

“Advertising is the modern substitute for argument; its function is to make the worse appear the better.”

-George Santayana

Over the years, we’ve found ways to skip ads.  We record shows and fast forward through them to watch what we want.

Lately, I’ve been skipping the news because I’m sick of the biased reporting, from either side of the story.

Advertising somehow makes having hemorrhoids, toe fungus, yellow teeth and bad breath seem better.  All of it at the cost of the fast speaker at the end telling you all of the things that will harm you when you use the cure they are selling.

The news tells you all the harm that is happening to you to make you feel worse.  So advertisements during the news hour is a recipe for depression or anger.

I hope all of this crap is just the result of it being an election year and will go away after November.  Unfortunately, since they’ve already gotten rid of Brian Williams, Bill O’Reilly, Matt Lauer, Katy Couric and the rest of the losers and the news still sucks it probably won’t.

I just don’t watch now and I feel better.  Tell me when it changes.

 

Great Sayings – Right vs. Wrong by William Penn

We are constantly being herded like sheep by the media, politicians, celebtards, sports stars, corporations and social media to the pen of group think.  Do what we say, not what we do.  Buy this and your life will be better.  Vote for me and I’ll do anything for you (until I get elected, then my goal is to get re-elected…not help you).  It goes on depending on their agenda.

We are born with a conscience.  Even Cain knew it was wrong to kill Abel before any law was handed down about murder.

So no matter whether or not you choose follow along like a sheeple, right vs. wrong still exist regardless of what we do to convince ourselves otherwise.

Critical thinking and being strong enough to stand up for what is right is hard when you are pressured to go along to get along.  Be strong and don’t be afraid to be right.  In the long run it is best.  You will also be able to live with yourself instead of second guessing what you should have done.

Great Sayings – Daniel Patrick Moynihan on Opinion vs. Facts

Everyone has both.  Some choose one over the other.  Most mesh the two together.

The difficulty in this day of being barraged by social media and a 24/7/365 news hype cycle is that you can choose to go with your bias and only see one side of any story.  This is dangerous regardless of which side you view it from.

Don’t believe the scare tactics of the money hustlers who rush people into a position like sheep herders trying to corral the flock into group think.  The tactic is shame for not subjugating yourself to the PC position of the day.

It takes courage to step out and stand for what is right, especially in the start of a crisis or an event in time. This requires critical thinking as to discovery of the real facts and applying the necessary logic to come to the right conclusion.  It also can take time.  The media and politicians will try to rush us into judgement based on opinion.

As they said in Watergate, follow the money and you’ll usually see through those who are self-serving.

Most of all, don’t be a sheep.  Think for yourselves and don’t take anything you read online as gospel, except for the Gospel.

Sooner or later, time exposes the truth.  Whether you want to believe it or not is now up to you.

The 10 Cannot’s – Inserting Reality Into Today’s Politics (And Woke Culture)

Some sanity and reasonableness should be considered when putting yourself out into the social media universe. Everyone seems to think that it is now their responsibility to tell us how to think, speak and act.

Here are 10 logical statements that are not new, but should have been taught to those who think they should tell us what to do, especially by politicians, the media and celebtards.  I wish George Orwell were alive today to see how right he was when he wrote 1984.

PC culture is ruining our society and frankly is taking the fun out of life for those of us who don’t get offended easily.

It’s time for a lot of people to grow up and act like adults.  Personally, I blame the educational system.  It has a considerable lack of diversity in terms of being able to view all sides of an issue before opening there mouths or post on Twitter, which I now call Hater.  Other platforms are becoming just as bad, but the hate usually starts there.

Rep. Stephen M. Young inserted into the Congressional Record, in 1950, an article from Harper’s magazine, written by a Lincoln scholar, Albert A. Wolman, listing most of the ”Ten Cannots” and other material falsely attributed to Lincoln.

The 10 Cannots:

1) You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.

2) You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.

3) You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.

4) You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.

5) You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.

6) You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.

7) You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.

8) You cannot establish security on borrowed money.

9) You cannot build character and courage by taking away men’s initiative and independence.

10) You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.

How Racism and White Supremacy Are The New Godwin’s Law

Authors Note: I have a tendency to notice patterns in both a macro and micro universes. I’ve been watching this one brew for a while now.

FIRST, WHAT IS GODWIN’S LAW?

Reformulated in the Net.Legends FAQs “Usenet Rule #4”:

“Any off-topic mention of Hitler or Nazis will cause the thread it is mentioned in to come to an irrelevant and off-topic end very soon; every thread on Usenet has a constantly-increasing probability to contain such a mention.”

It is generally accepted that whoever is the first to play the “Hitler card” has lost the argument as well as any trace of respect, as having to resort to comparing your adversary to the most infamous mass-murdering dictator in history generally means you’ve run out of better arguments. Thus, once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever debate was in progress. This principle is itself frequently referred to as Godwin’s law.

Disclaimer: This blog post does not take a position on racism, it’s prevalence, who is or isn’t or might be racist and my position on this subject. Aristotle noted that the mark of an educated mind is to entertain a thought without accepting it.  Therefore I am observing a speech and behavioral pattern of the public.  In other words it’s on them, not me.

It is also noted that a trait of people with a higher IQ is that you can argue from multiple perspectives (unfortunately so can lawyers and politicians who may or may not be of higher intelligence – especially politicians and especially millennial politicians).

The original Godwin’s Law has lost its’ sting since everyone is now Hitler, so the new talking point is racism or white supremacy. Rather than argue on the merits of the position of the person (political candidates mostly since they dominate the news) the go to is now calling the other person one of these two pejorative names.  This constant overuse has devalued the meaning of the words and rendered them ineffective at worst and boring at best.

Here is a quick search that shows views from multiple points doing just this:

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=IXpRXZrPHOqH_Qa9hbr4AQ&q=examples+of+politicians+being+called+racist&oq=examples+of+politicians+being+called+racist&gs_l=psy-ab.3…2240.2240..3652…0.0..0.186.324.0j2……0….2j1..gws-wiz.aEnMfNpKcHc&ved=0ahUKEwja48Tux_3jAhXqQ98KHb2CDh8Q4dUDCAc&uact=5

This is in direct conflict with Martin Luther King’s evocative phrase: “I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”  Now, it is common to hear you are a racist or white supremacist because you don’t agree with me.  It greatly devalues MLK’s position.

A General Definition of racism

1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race, racial prejudice or discrimination.

While I could list any or all of the comments that have been made in public themselves could be racist in tone, one could make the case for or against whether the accused are really racist. Calling someone a racist is easy but proving most of these ad hominem attacks is harder.

One would need to know what is inside the person making the statements to know if it were really true or just talking points. I won’t and am not even sure if I can make that value judgement. These attacks are easy enough to find (see the media below).

This is not the point of this post. I am not here to call someone a racist or White supremacist (or Hitler), rather to point out a trend.

In the department of redundancy department, this discussion is that the replacement for Godwin’s Law is that you are not Hitler, instead you are racist for whatever reason or whatever you say.

Why is this the case? The overuse of Godwin’s Law has made it impotent in political circles, the media and on social media platforms. Hitler stands with few others in history, perhaps Mao, Stalin or Pol Pot as true villains. Nobody really believes that the other person is like Hitler, they are just trying to make the worst case as they flush their argument down the toilet due to lack of substance.

HOW TO WIN YOUR POLITICAL RACE OR PUT YOUR OPPONENT ON THE DEFENSIVE WITHOUT TAKING A POSITION

What most of the accusers are doing is described in Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals numbers 7-13 as follows:

  • “Keep the pressure on.”
  • “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
  • “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.”
  • “If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside.”
  • “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”

Rather than argue on a platform, beliefs and issues, it is far easier to make your opponent defend themselves, and put them off their talking points.

Example: Candidate 1) If elected, I’ll lower taxes if elected (insert any issue here because it’s about to be destroyed).

Candidate 2) my opponent is Hitler and molests collies.

Press coverage: Candidate 1 is a well known collie molester. How long has this person been molesting Collies? The first question in the next debate; Candidate 1, are you still molesting Collies?

Now insert the word racist or white supremacist for molesting collies and you get the point of why this is effective.

  • “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

HOW THE PRESS BECOMES AN ENABLER

A common adage is that sex sells, as do murders, rapes, political embarrassments and anything not good news. Guess what they will print (hint: collie molester)?

A not so recent trend is that there is a common thread where a preponderance of reporters has similar talking points concurrently. There is a groupthink that causes the media to focus on a particular phrase, word or subject. Like piranha on carcass, they hammer it home. https://www.google.com/search?q=why+do+news+anchors+say+the+same+thing&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwim9dyQxv3jAhWFB80KHeyQAE0Q1QIoAHoECAsQAQ&biw=1440&bih=825

Since the new go to in Godwin’s Law is you are a racist and/or white supremacist, it makes for headlines that sell advertising. I can also be taken as ideological.  This is the de-facto statement now to the point that it has lost effectiveness.

Having spent decades working with (and against) all forms of media, they have a tendency to take the position of them being right, even if proven wrong. A correction is meaningless as once a statement is printed, it is still in the minds of the reader. Almost no one reads the corrections.

Most are journalists who write about a topic because it is assigned to them.  In the case of social media everyone thinks they have the moral high ground.

SOCIAL MEDIA

I’m not going to spend much time here, because most people have gotten into an Internet argument. Nobody wins unless the motive of one of the combatants is to piss off the other. It won’t matter how factual your argument is because it is just Internet road rage.

If you go to the above link, you see the outcome and great advice on how to handle this.

So the net result of overusing this theme is the same thing that happens with all overuse. Godwin’s Law is becoming meaningless. The definition of what racism really is and when the word should be used to protect the oppressed has been damaged. Even Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals suffers from overuse and tediousness.

The political landscape is a train wreck of who can sling the most mud. Watch the ratings nosedive for upcoming debates.

Stay out of it on Social Media except to observe who isn’t smart enough to stay out of this pool. With each use of the attack, the meaning becomes less valid and meaningful.

I thought about calling someone a racist instead of Hitler the Simonds Law, since I haven’t found this discussion fully hashed out, but I’d rather be associated with something more positive.

Everyone is a loser who engages in this behavior. My advice is grow up or be better educated to discuss your position better than: you are Hitler/racist/white supremacist and whatever the next insult is.

It used to be that to call someone Hitler was the ultimate insult, albeit the indication that the argument is lost.  Has calling them a racist and/or a white supremacist suffered the same fate?

Actual Maps of Where The #Shitholes Are – An A-Polititical Post On Where They Exist

First, I am not going to weigh in on what a world leader has said.  Every time I have ever tried it, nothing is gained as everyone has their own opinion and trying to sway it is not what I care about.  Enjoy your center, left, right or whatever political position you wish.

I was looking for whether this actually exists.  Here is what I’ve found.

UPDATE: Portland is the newest shit hole. Click on the link: Portland: American epicenter of degeneracy, depression, and ANTIFA.

Here is a link and a screenshot of a map from the Rice Institute based showing countries with the most open defecation.

Forbes published a list of the world’s dirtiest cities.  Without passing judgement, they seem to line up with the shitholes in the map so the facts seem to be in order.

Next, is it possible that the United States has places where there is open defecation?  I found that map also.

Below is the link and screenshot also, but in case you don’t recognize it, this is San Francisco.

Now, after reading this, one can add it to their travel plans to go and help, or avoid for sanitary purposes, you choose.  If you go to San Francisco, zoom in and you can see where to not step in a pile of poop.  As I type that, I realize that it is sad for what is supposed to be one of the leading cities of the US, and one so close to silicon valley.

It also gives everyone equal political fodder to take shots at whomever.  In these days of political partisanship, nothing or nobody is safe by the 3rd or 4th comment, so I expect the same.

I just got curious and I wondered if what was said was true or not. Apparently it is.

Here is the link to the recent study of sanitation including feces, used syringes and other disease carrying trash in the heart of San Francisco.  It’s a shame since it is in the heart of the restaurant and hotel area.  You’d think that the tourism officials would do something about this, but looking at the graph indicates the problem escalating.

UPDATE: San Francisco is getting over 80 calls a day to report human feces for clean up.  In the same report were almost as many instances of needles despite the fact that there are safe injection spaces for shooting up an illegal drug that destroys lives.

 

UPDATE: It turns out that Denver is now officially classified as a shithole also.  They passed an act that you can drop trou and pinch a loaf right on the street.  Here is the story and the reason why they passed the law.

UPDATE: It looks like Hawaii isn’t as pristine as one thinks of it.  The cesspools and the water around the islands are contaminated enough to make it a shithole also.  There is a link within this link that goes to the WSJ.

Video Update: A large portion of Orange county is now a 3rd world shithole also.

After all is said and done, I thought that having to have a map to not step in a pile of human feces makes a city the biggest shithole.  It turns out that I was wrong.

According to the Government services including the EPA, ACS and the Census bureau comes this little gem:

The City that Never Sleeps ranked the highest in three out of five categories, placing it as shittest-city-in-the-nation of 427.9 on Busy Bee’s “dirtiness index.” The next closest competitor for all the wrong reasons is Los Angeles, which has a dirtiness index of 317.8. To complete the top five list, the remaining dirtiest cities are Chicago, Philadelphia, and San Francisco.

So not only do you have to pay way more more to live in these places, they have worse air, bigger rats and more cockroaches, they turn out to be the shitholes that we all thought they were.  Why anyone would choose to live there knowing there?

The Real Nature Of Freedom, Economic and Political and the Interrelationship Between The Two

In these days of divisiveness, there are some facts based on economics that are hard to refute, even if you don’t want to admit it.  I enjoy discussion by people of high IQ and of great wisdom, something the world of Political Correctness is sadly overlooking.

What Is the Hierarchy of Identity Politics?

The 2008 and 2012 election showed that a coalition of minorities was the winning formula.  As for 2016, not so much.

With all the minority identity groups out there vying for political power, social media control, fund raising and media presence; how do they stack up when they compete for hierarchy?  At some point, when the power and money is being doled out, the queue is determined by some order.  Who are these groups and how do they vie for power?

Author disclaimer: I have no dog in this hunt.  I am a pattern watcher and try to learn from them.  Human nature is hard to understand and explain due to it’s ever changing allies and favored group status depending on circumstances.  I was watching the groups at the last election and wondered how you coalesce a group of disparate people with conflicting causes as a voter block.

Who are they?

While this isn’t a comprehensive list and I am not discriminating as I just Googled it, the last election revealed the groups of Black Lives Matter (BLM), LGBTQ (apologies if I omitted a letter), Islam (including ISIS), socialists, Antifa, environmentalists and feminists.  They each compete for their cause and have usually selected an enemy with whom they are opposed to, but are now conflicting with each other in the power grab.  They for the most part have an ideological position (some more than others) and garner the lion’s share of media attention.

What happens when the identity groups who desire to command the headlines conflict for attention and finances?

 

Before the haters come out, I write this post because of my position that one of the characteristics of a higher IQ is the ability to argue from multiple positions on a subject. I will proceed with this post from that premise.

I also am merely an observer of trends. The consolidating power of the above listed groups is becoming a relevant discussion regardless of where you source your information. I’ve excluded the typical mainstream media as sources of information on both sides as their coverage is either too conservative or liberal.  Their inherent bias excludes them from this conversation.  I also excluded Hollywood and celebrities since they have a limited integration with the real world and often spout declarations for others which they do not adhere to.  When you get to the heart of their talent, they pretend to be others and to take their opinions seriously is difficult at best.

Here are non-comprehensive, yet representative examples of identity group disagreements.

BLM vs. LGBTQ

I first noticed this when BLM shut down a gay pride parade.

These are two significant voter populations when added together.

What surprised me that it was during the last election cycle and both groups made up a voting block for the same candidate.  From said article:

BLM held Toronto Pride hostage, unless their demands, which included excluding police from the parade, were immediately met.

(Pride parades typically have contingents of LGBT cops and firefighters, and booths set up by the local LGBT officers’ group at the accompanying street festival.)

Judging by their success in forcing Toronto Pride to capitulate, I suspect we’ll see Black Lives Matter groups protesting more Pride parades in the future. And as a longtime national and international LGBT rights activist, I have a problem with that.

In my internet search for protests, it seems that BLM also protested and shut down Bernie Sanders and Hillary whom they supported.  It goes without saying that they all protested Trump, but that is not the point of my curiosity as I assumed this was a given.  This alone is surprising since both are a part of the coalition of voters candidates need to be elected per the aforementioned 2008/2012/2016 campaigns.

ISLAM vs. Feminists and LGBTQ

I later observed the Muslim and ISIS positions that women are treated poorly and that homosexuals were declared wrong and being executed. On a side point, they also considered most pets as unclean and black dogs should be killed (animal cruelty), which brings in the animal rights group, but they don’t be as significant as the other groups currently.  Apparently, women don’t have the same rights as men and must be subservient.

Then there is the recent Linda Sansour dust up revealing this dichotomy:

  • What the West needs to know is that in the Muslim world, jihad is considered more important than women, family happiness and life itself. If we are told, as Linda Sarsour said, that Islam stands for peace and justice, what we are not told is that “peace” in Islam will come only after the whole world has converted to Islam, and that “justice” means law under Sharia: whatever is inside Sharia is “justice;” whatever is not in Sharia is not “justice.”
  • Rebelling against Sharia is, sadly, for the Muslim woman, unthinkable. How can a healthy and normal feminist movement develop under an Islamic legal system that can flog, stone and behead women? That is why Sarsour’s jihadist kind of feminism is no heroic kind of feminism but the only feminism a Muslim woman can practice that will give her a degree of respect, acceptance, and even preferential treatment over other women. In Islam, that is the only kind of feminism allowed to develop.

It further goes on to say:

Sarsour apparently identifies as a feminist. Sarsour’s kind of feminism, however, embraces the most oppressive legal system, especially for women: Islamic religious law, Sharia. Sarsour’s feminism is supposedly for empowering women, but it twists logic in a way similar to how Muslim preachers do when they claim that beating one’s wife is a husband’s way of honoring her.

Here is the dichotomy:

Pro-Sharia feminism is a perverted kind of feminism that could not care less about the well-being of oppressed Muslim women. Sarsour’s logic concerning women does not differ much from that of Suad Saleh, an Egyptian female Islamic cleric, who recently justified on Egyptian TV the doctrine of intentional humiliation and rape of captured women in Islam. Saleh said, “One of the purposes of raping captured enemy women and young girls was to humiliate and disgrace them and that is permissible under Islamic law.” There was not even a peep in Egypt’s civil society about such a statement.

On 7/25/17 a direct conflict happened when this occurred: An Oakland Muslim plotted to attack a gay club in San Francisco and talked about killing thousands of innocents on behalf of ISIS.

Finally, there is this non-sequitur that I can’t fathom:

“Feminist” Muslim women calling beatings by their husbands a “blessing from Allah”!

Who wants a beating?

ISLAM (ISIS) vs. Antifa

I don’t fully understand this one.  It has the trappings of a sibling quarrel at best.  ISIS is claiming that Antifa has culturally appropriated their uniforms, that being their black flag and terrorist tactics. 

Here are some details:

Based on this proof, we hereby request that the UNHRC’s CESCR begin an immediate investigation into this matter, and, if you concur that ANTIFA is culturally appropriating ISIS, that you use all means at your disposal to put a stop to it. You could start by visiting this ANTIFA website, which contains links to many of its affiliates throughout the world.

Sincerely,

ISIS High Command

PS: You might mention to the ANTIFA punks that in quite a few aspects, we are at war with the very same people, organizations and ideas, and, in fact, Western civilization itself. So, if you could arrange a sit-down over tea with us, and them, it might serve all of our interests, and provide a holistic, inclusive resolution to our complaint.

Islam appears to have support from the media and the left side of the political sphere as does the other listed minorities claiming status.  One can see the obvious conflicts.

Socialists

It appeared that quite a bit of traction was gained by the Bernie Sanders crowd.  It seemed to have enough momentum to be a winning group within its’ primary. Somehow, it was defeated by a political machine by what is being revealed as suspicious activities.

Nevertheless, a discussion of the socialism movement by Ross Wolf summarizes some of my points:

Ross Wolfe argues in The Charnel House, the identity politics that arose in the 1960s, ‘70s and ’80s developed in reaction to the identity politics of actually-existing socialism itself:

The various forms of identity politics associated with the “new social movements” coming out of the New Left during the ’60s, ’70s, and ’80s (feminism, black nationalism, gay pride) were themselves a reaction, perhaps understandable, to the miserable failure of working-class identity politics associated with Stalinism coming out of the Old Left during the ’30s, ’40s, and ’50s (socialist and mainstream labor movements). Working-class identity politics — admittedly avant la lettre — was based on a crude, reductionist understanding of politics that urged socialists and union organizers to stay vigilant and keep on the lookout for “alien class elements.” Any and every form of ideological deviation was thought to be traceable to a bourgeois or petit-bourgeois upbringing. One’s political position was thought to flow automatically and mechanically from one’s social position, i.e. from one’s background as a member of a given class within capitalist society.

Questions I Have

If you are courting one group, how do you avoid alienating another group if there is acrimony?  At some point you step on the wrong toes.

If there is limited money, how does the donor decide who gets it without upsetting other groups?

How do you herd this group of cats to vote together when trying to win an election?  It worked twice, but failed recently and there is finger pointing as to why.

What is Racist?

In Seattle, they can’t clean the sidewalks with pressure washers because it could be racist.

Council member Larry Gossett said he didn’t like the idea of power-washing the sidewalks because it brought back images of the use of hoses against civil-rights activists.

It seems that non-black people using gifs are being racist also.  I don’t understand this one though.

Finally, who wins this victim’s game?

I found this, which is someone else’s answer and not necessarily my view, but it seems to apply here:

The criteria used to judge that is two-fold: the perceived grievance and victimhood status of the group (more = better), and the amount of room within it for ideological and political pluralism (more = worse).

So I guess you have out victim everyone else.  By doing so, it disrupts the coalition of identities required by one of the political parties to win elections.  I suppose it is a popularity contest to win the money and the status.

My final observation is that human nature is the constant here.  People are selfish enough to grab power and money when possible.  Most do not have the ability to argue from multiple positions on the same subject and are ideologues for their cause.

This alone is going to make a coalition such as the one that voted in the president in 2008 difficult.  Being a female wasn’t enough of a victim status in the 2016 election.

These are things I ponder as we wind our way down the path of being a country.

 

The State of Our Next Generation

A discussion on presidential qualifications at Purdue recently produced the following discussion on who was qualified to be president.  I hold most colleges in the same esteem as this one, except for Ivy League schools and UC-Berkley which are worse.

You, who worry about Democrats versus Republicans–relax, here is our real problem.

In a Purdue University classroom, they were discussing the qualifications to be President of the United States .

It was pretty simple. The candidate must be a natural
born citizen of at least 35 years of age.

However, one girl, in the class immediately started in on how unfair was the requirement to be a natural born citizen. In short, her opinion was that this requirement prevented many capable individuals from becoming president. The class was taking it in and letting her rant, and many jaws hit the floor when she wrapped up her argument by stating “What makes a natural born citizen any more qualified to lead this country than one born by C-section?”

Yep, these are the same kinds of 18-year-olds that are now voting in our elections!

And they walk among us and they reproduce !!!

You, who worry about Democrats versus Republicans–relax, here is our real problem.

Yep, these are the same kinds of 18-year-olds that are now voting in our elections! And who voted for our current President and Congress who continue to fail Americans every time they attempt anything at this point