Malicious! White House Again Refuses To Consider Travel Ban On Ebola Countries… http://t.co/AOGbSh97Qf via @WeaselZippers
Just after the government shutdown the national parks department what could only be speculated on were on orders from the oval office itself, then blockaded the WWII memorial. What is to be gained by apply political pressure to what everyone seems to refer to “as the greatest generation”? On Tuesday an Honor Flight of World War II veterans arrived to visit the memorial erected in their honor. For their service, and sacrifice to this nation. But these now old men and women arrived to see blockades erected to an open air outside memorial, effectively keeping them out to receive the honor bestowed on them by the government of the United States while they were yet still alive to enjoy it. For many of these vet’s it would be a trip of a life time, perhaps the last opportunity in this life time?
What kind of government instructs a national park service to blockade the WWII memorial? What sadistic person would decide to abuse old people in this manner? Not to mention veterans that at one time were asked to run head long into enemy fire without question; only now to be used as useful political pawns when they’re on their last journeys in life?
These kinds of trips mean so much to these people, their stoic views as they look onto lost memories and lost buddies, those quiet gazes, contemplations, those tearful observations, those untold sacrifices both physical and emotional. Then to hold at arm’s length away their memories hidden deep within unspoken thoughts quietly displayed within an escaping tear rolling down their cheeks as they would while looking at this memorial is an unforgivable abuse.
The motives and motivations of these disciples of destruction within our government, those very people who would decide not allowing the vet’s to be alone in the memorial, after they took it upon themselves to crash the gates. Ok crashing the gates was a kind of over statement, but then that was Tuesday. Wednesday the park was instructed to make a more permanent blockade–to wire the steel gates shut. Why would this administration ratchet up the force against old heroes, and rhetoric in the marketplace of ideas?
They themselves have been quietly clamoring to avoid the crushing effects of socialism under Obamacare. After all the divided power of the government is distasteful to Mr. Obama who in the end demanding that he and he alone will decide. Who will be placed under the law, who will be left to comply too it? Who will pay the price for standing in the way? Unfortunately that leaves the WWII vet’s smack dab in the middle of a political fight as pawns.
Imagine for a moment, this administration found it more important to protect the WWII memorial from its veterans of that Great War in their closing days of life, with more man power and force, then sending ample men and equipment to protect the embassy and our ambassador in Benghazi. All over Obamacare; a law that has fundamentally changed America from full-time employment being able to pursue happiness, to part-time employment with diminishing happiness; in short it is a job graveyard—R.I.P. your hours, your dreams, your coverage, your memorials, and your service.
Liberalism for the comfortably numb.
We have slipped down that slippery slope of liberalism to a point where we as a society are engaging in an open holocaust against “Words”!
The mad scientist dissection is nothing short of a modern mass murders dismemberment of the English language and discarding the verbal bodies in the blast furnace of political correctness. Yes some words have just got to go! The world is full of words that support, hate, and are just unwanted in general because of that childhood saying which turns out to be wrong—“Sticks and stones may break my bones but words may never hurt Me.” expressed by a thin-skinned liberal.
With the loopy lexicon of modern times today’s society has become hyper offended over what seems to be a speck in society’s eye, missing completely the blinding beam being pushed into everyone else’s eyes through political correctness. There are those people that are on a crusade to vanquish words from our vocabulary that could also offend people. Those kinds of people that are offended far too easily, or the ones who run around just looking for offences and then complain, or the thin-skinned who also have a problem with self-esteem. It is one in the same in the whirlwind of shallow thinking within the minds of liberals. Now just think for a moment, how easy it is to become offended because those types are unwilling to build up their own self-esteem? Does society have a greater responsibility to caress, cuddle, or even embrace anyone’s low self-esteem, then regulate everyone else’s life to your pleasures?
Can we eliminate one offence without offending another, even in the slightest way? You can please some of the people some of the time, but never all of the people all of the time.
How can fisherman, clergyman, mankind, journeyman, and freshman somehow reflect gender biases in a negative way? Should we then change “Freshman” to become “First-year-student?
SEATTLE, April 22 (Reuters) – Washington state’s governor signed into law on Monday the final piece of a six-year effort to rewrite state laws using gender-neutral vocabulary, replacing terms such as “fisherman” and “freshman” with “fisher” and “first-year student.”
“This was a larger effort than I had envisioned. Mankind means man and woman,” said Democratic state Senator Jeanne Kohl-Welles of Seattle.
Democratic state Senator Jeanne Kohl-Welles of Seattle never considered that for the liberal left it seems never to be content with bending, distorting their own minds, it is about distorting yours too in an effort to bring about a feeling of self-importance, accomplishment in their minds and the hell with your feelings, your mind-set, and your offence.
The new gender-neutral references, for example, include “journey-level plumber” instead of “journeyman plumber,” “handwriting” in place of “penmanship,” and “signal operator” for “signalman.”
“There’s no good reason for keeping our legal terms anachronistic and with words that do not respect our current contemporary times,” state senator Kohl-Welles.
There isn’t any good reason, or any better terms as replacements to those old out dated words. It is for the most part a liberal war on man / men and any compound word containing them. The words “airmen” and “seaman,” for example, probably will not be changed due to objections from the military. Civil engineering terms such as “man-hole” and “man lock,” also will not be changed because no common-sense substitutes could easily be found as of yet. And so the manipulation, and the gray matter massage continues it attack on common sense and critical thinking.
Manipulation must have slipped by in the first wave of attacks on “men” with the first three letters of that one?
Waging war on the true wicked culprits of social discourse, “Men / Man”, should be held right alongside of “Women’s health”, “Women’s rights”, as being the same kind of gender bias, being too focused and gender specific, net alone containing the word “Men” within them? How this different to the gender specific words clergyman, mankind, journeyman, or even penmanship? Even the some advertisements or presentations of “Brest cancer awareness” is being pushed in a gender specific way in the public’s mind towards “Women’s health issues” as if men don’t also have issues with breast cancer. Where is the fairness? Where are the gender neutral terms to eliminate all and any biases? Should we just add small print foot notes to any words and or terms so they can escape political correctness that has run amok?
Changing terms to reflect current contemporary times has nothing to do with it. Social engineering does! Such engineering produces reluctance to have an effective opposition to political views in an unflattering way towards liberal policies. That is the goal and the tactic of the liberal left. It is about control, and their feelings of being socially superior to your small-minded conservative views. It is the attempt to eliminate personal free choice, and install command and control style socialism, forgetting all the while—“A person changed against his / her own will is of the same opinion still.”
So off-color terms like fisherman, clergyman, mankind, journeyman, freshman, and penmanship defiantly have to go immediately, whereas at the same time and instantaneously airmen, seamen, man-hole, man lock, or even women’s health, gets a temporary reprieve. Only so long as needed until we can declare a winner to this game of gray matter twister, by the presentation of the kinder gentler replacement terms to be used.
Declaring such a winner isn’t going to be easy though. In Seattle, Washington there is a movement to upstage the gender specific replacement terms with the newly unlikable terms produced by enlightened closed-minded new age liberals. Seattle bans the use of “citizen”, and “brown bag”. And you never thought just how the terms could even be offensive?
A memo which was circulated within local government in Washington State, before being leaked to local TV station KOMO News, advised state workers that they should refrain from using such phrases in official business.
According to the memo, the word ‘citizen’ is offensive to those Seattlelites who are residents in the city, but not US citizens.
The phrase ‘brown bag’ is offensive for its having been used as a verb during racial segregation in the United States. When deciding whether or not a black person was light-skinned enough to enter a private residence, servants would ‘brown bag’ them: using a paper grocery bag to gauge their skin tone.
The memo’s author Elliott Bronstein, who works in the city’s Office for Civil Rights, wrote: “Luckily we’ve got options. For ‘citizens’, how about ‘residents’?”.
“To replace ‘brown bag’”, he continued, tackling the offensive phrase that employees use to describe their packed lunches, “we can go with ‘lunch-and-learn’ or ‘sack lunch’”.
And to think the director of the Office for civil Rights, as a real job is to keep the perception of the never-ending war and civil rights alive, and on front page. I am sure all of the left leaning liberals are just propping themselves up with accolades and at-a-boy slaps on the back, along with dreams of being an Olympian gold medalist, “The mental twister champion of the world”. Of course all of their efforts are fueled by buying lunch from the somewhat racy business that also goes by the name “Brown Bag’s” lunch cart. Located just outside of the governmental offices that helps to produce, and promotes this war on words.
I suppose if the Washington States “legalized pot” doesn’t turn your brain to mush, then there are always mental games that will….. Like finding a suitable replacement for the term “Man hole” as an accomplishment in turning these current contemporary times into an unforgiving, vengeful verbal holocaust, soothed by dancing butterfly feelings of being stupidly comfortably numb.
Picture provided by the via the Telegraph story.
Seattle bans words ‘citizen’ and ‘brown bag’ via @Telegraph http://fw.to/0WW9M5R
New Washington State Law Bans Words ‘Penmanship,’ ‘Freshman … http://www.ijreview.com/2013/05/49446-new-washington-state-law-bans-words-penmanship-freshman-fisherman-as-sexist/
To those of you who believe in a government made of two parties with separate and different ideas and principles; that at their core they are supposed to also get along with each other, to compromise values and principles for the sake of getting things done? You are living in a dream. That is no government that represents different segments of society, beliefs systems, political views, or even states issues. It is akin to why we fought the revolutionary war in the first place– to rid ourselves of a KING and allow for the greatest amount of liberty for all, given to us by GOD!
“Let’s have a new first party – a Republican Party – raising a banner of bold colors, no pale pastels. A banner instantly recognizable as standing for certain values which will not be compromised.” – Ronald Reagan, 1975
“While I myself am a registered conservative, I look to the Republican Party as the closest representative of conservative values in American politics. Overtime, that appears to be fading. Sometimes I look at Washington lately and I wonder.”– Quote Shawn Hannity
It seems that there is a policy gripping the electorate of today that is inspiring the belief, “You must go along in order to get along”. This kind of policy is completely at odds with freedom and liberty. It hands over all control to few people with like-minded views. A command and control style of government, after all who will determine the “get along” part and enforce the “must go along part” if not a King like power?
To the liberal mind the use of government in their favor isn’t forced control, so it isn’t seen as some forced compliance to a power. At the same time they would use the systems of liberty and freedom, free speech and alike to gain power. Once in power though those tools are no longer useful and become too dangerous to be allowed.
Republicans at their core should be opposed to such governing. They should present bold arguments to the people so they are able to look at the contrasts, the differences between these two political standards. Instead they see short-term political successes and lust after that success. They are willing to forfeit their bold colors to duplicate that success for themselves by following the Democrats advice and models. For the GOP this demonstrates that they have lost faith in their founding principles. They see power slipping away from them and so embrace the “political life-line” made of smoke in a failed attempt to rescue themselves from losing sight and faith in liberty and GOD given rights. The GOP is willing to slit their wrists, by watered down policies they embrace and birthing version of the Democrat policies as their own. As the republican self-inflicted suicidal wounds bleed potential votes they don’t even see liberty fading away and the need to protect it by standing in the way of Democratic managed decay.
Where are the leaders of tomorrow that prize lady liberty, who would be sworn to protect her, not for personal benefits, but for future ones?? Who will boldly point towards the Democrat policies, deceptions, manipulations, and corruptions that represent virtually every antithesis of the conservative principles: Big government, lack of freedom, invasion of privacy, increased taxes, harms businesses, higher costs with worse results, more government dependency, less innovation, more regulations.
Is it possible to distinguish one party from the other. Like two bold colored candles burning together, slowly melting into one. though their rhetoric seems partisan and different it is drowned out by deceitful actions that are nearly impossible to discern one from the other. With the melting of those two candles one light is being extinguished as they melt into the same pot of power. No longer two separated ideas with their own principles willing to stand firm for what they believe in.
I call out to the Republican party first and then to the rest of you, what man or women is going to allow lady liberty to be turned into some whore of tyranny; who of you would hand to their future kids the principles of compromising national security by refusing to defend liberty politically here at home? Who of you are counting on renewed leadership between the melting pot of leaders of today and those mythical future leaders you all point to in hope of finding “them” that would lead rather than to cower in the shadows?
So what are you going to do about it?
Should any nation ever have to go to war it in imperative that such actions are prosecuted in such a way to minimize needless death and harm to our service members, and to a lesser degree future harm to the nation as a whole. For the last 5 some odd years we have had a president and his complicit, and or corrupt policy makers running the war on terror. Mr. Obama seems more at ease using the technological approach to war, launching hundreds of attacks with drones that produce uncertain outcomes to the same degree or greater with regards to civilian damage. The use of drones still leaves finger prints behind but barely gets noticed in the world-wide press. War is messy and therefore hard to avoid the world-wide media reports on it. Besides military’s are built of humans, each of which has the potential to create a political nightmare in the PR game of politics with miss guided personal actions.
If you remove or greatly limit the human mind from the game of war and political war, then real war takes on the appearances of the video game “Call of duty”. A push button affair of drones circling above waiting their call to action. Without responsibility’s, guilt, and door left wide open to deny any involvement.
The politics and the excuses used to wage war like this–is politically positive in its presentation as purely cost-effective and an efficient use of taxes to the taxpayers. On one hand we have leadership concerned with the cost effectiveness of running a war on terror. On the other hand we have that same leadership bathing itself in waste, unconcerned with debts, allowing for a monetary windfall to be paid to our terrorist enemy’s as contractors. The use of contractors is again the alter ego of these same politicians looking to bask in the lime-light of cost effectiveness; yet throw all caution to the wind in hiring the enemy to do the job of being their contractors for profit. Without ever using critical thinking to game out any scenario as to how the enemy will use their ill-gotten gains. That’s what passes as being politically wise these days?
The reason that this goes on is that we have a “Congress of 535 people”, each one is either complicit, corrupt, or under threat, keeping them from doing their jobs without compromise. Focusing only on their reelection and maintaining the statues quo. There is something to be said, when our government chooses to call the terrorist act of the FT. Hood shooter–work place violence. If these wizards can’t even recognize terrorists and call them as such here at home, then how can they see just who they are dealing with abroad?
Supporters of the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan have been getting U.S. military contracts, and American officials are citing “due process rights” as a reason not to cancel the agreements, according to an independent agency monitoring spending.
The U.S. Army Suspension and Debarment Office has declined to act in 43 such cases, John Sopko, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, said today in a letter accompanying a quarterly report to Congress.
“I am deeply troubled that the U.S. military can pursue, attack, and even kill terrorists and their supporters, but that some in the U.S. government believes we cannot prevent these same people from receiving a government contract,” Sopko said.
“There appears to be a growing gap between the policy objectives of Washington and the reality of achieving them in Afghanistan, especially when the government must hire and oversee contractors to perform its mission,” said Sopko, whose post was mandated by Congress.
The Pentagon is scheduled to deliver its own Afghanistan status report to Congress today. Its appraisal, which is months late, will outline progress from October 2012 through March and concerns that deal with handing over security operations to the Afghan military.
Al-Qaeda Backers Found With U.S. Contracts in Afghanistan http://bloom.bg/1c8NDZY via @BloombergNews
The problem is not with any elitist separation between the have and the have-nots, but the intentionality and ideology behind consumption. If conservatives are to change any views of people up and down the economic ladder today? We must make our policies known as being about people helping people—not of arguing about things or policies, but explaining how every policy of government will help or hurt people, not just an explanation, we support this and we are against that.
Today; despite having a black president in office, why do we have what seems a bigger social divide and an increased amount of political special interest groups competing for a bigger slice of political consumerism?
Political powers or policies are being marketed to special interest groups in exchange for a perceived vote being cast for that political party’s policy. Political policies should be all-encompassing, designed for all the citizenry; after all it is government of the people and by the people? If it is about special interest groups or focused government, penalizing to some and rewarding to others. Where is the motto that we should be living by and supporting? Where is E-pluribus Unum? Should we be buying into these federal government policies forgetting about our own states or more narrowly our individual ability’s? How easily do we exchange individualism, and independence, for cheap defective products produced by political deceptions?
Political consumption produces products where it is easy to escape reality, while producing a false sense of social prestige, while slowly killing the human independent spirit, or the human potential within. With purchases that we make, do we buy because we need these things, or do we buy because we want these things?
It is human nature as with all animals in nature, in picking our paths in life with the least amount of resistance, or efforts needed in reaching our goals. The problem with taking the easy way out, it produces a faulty sense of accomplishment when indeed it is more of a successful manipulation; a taking advantage of people while using them to do our bidding, allowing them to make those efforts that should have been ours to make while claiming success. Looking towards government in this way is easy, accepting political consumption, policies to escape making a greater effort or escaping reality just the same, expecting social prestige in the proses as the easy way out, a temporary Band-Aid for our problems.
Do we buy into these political policies in order to help people or to validate self-worth? For people who see themselves as powerless it is a temptation hard to resist. But true power is in production, not in consumption. Policies designed to deceive in order to gain support is the product of government today. Accepting any notion that government is there to fix our problems in society only provides us with a faults sense, although economics and goods play a part in the quality of life, understanding the intentionality behind the political ideology leading us to choose to consume it or not? Is just as important to understand this no matter which side of the coin your on. There aren’t any government policies that will close the gap between the haves and the have-nots. But a clear understanding that government has created a society of consumption where on every level; consumption is exactly where there is the least amount of power and the maximum ability to manipulate. That is the nature of government, and how it quenches its thirst of ever greater power. The bottom line, power is in the production not in the consumption; you must produce to wield any lasting power, having the ability to save and invest even in yourself by changing lifestyles, are only talking points of some politicians but never widely supported policies of any political party or there pre designed future outcomes.
The ideology behind political consumption I contend is the major reason blacks as a special interest group remain near the bottom of the social ladder, because political consumption is a coping strategy designed to sooth insecurities and self-hatred while simultaneously eliminating a chance for economic progression.
I believe political consumption is why we have a border security problem, an illegal immigration problem as well. It is for the most part why government can’t ever accept free market solutions to society’s problems, but avoiding free market solutions in its self maintains the power pendulum on the side of government and a false sense of power within special interest groups courting government for special affections.
Government has created special interest groups in order to pool their resources together, focusing them as if it is their only way for survival as a whole; placing government and false policies as the only solutions. The only way to gain lost prestige, whether it’s social or economic. But the government has a secret vested interest in never providing a pathway towards success as preserved by these groups, by keeping them as consumers. These groups are willingly giving up their power and accepting a status of being a member of the permanent underclass, moving through false motivation in the direction of political shifting winds or desires at their own expense.
We celebrate “Independence day” the 4th of every July, Not dependence day by consuming government policies designed to strip power, dignity, and the can-do-attitude, formed the minds that need it most!
The more we demand of government, the more we have already accepted government’s role of being the producers, and citizens as being the underclass consumers.
Do we buy products like political policies, (the common belief of a charitable government) to help people or to validate self-worth?
The problem is not with any elitist separation between the have and the have-nots, but the intentionality and ideology behind the power struggle of government created consumption.