E Pluribus Unum

I’m pissed.  I mean I’m really pissed off over the influences that strangle our lives.  We all feel it, we are all affected by the same pressures but it makes me angry because of the futility of it all.  I’m frustrated, discouraged, embittered and mad at having lived my life and now being faced with an electorate that does nothing to help me and worse, an electorate that is hell bent on destroying what little hope I have left.  So ya I’m MAD as Hell.

I’m mad at having to defend my beliefs.  I’m mad at having to speak like everyone expects me to speak and not the way I want to speak.   I’m mad at being forced to recognize the choices of others just so they can feel better about themselves with no consideration with how I feel.

I’m enraged over the specter of a changing past that will affect my future.  I’ve lived my life based on that past, a past that is being belittled, dismantled and disavowed by short-sighted and selfish motives just so they can have their way.

I’m angered at my government that does nothing but tax and legislate but provides nothing in return.  They take my money, my hard earned money and give it to those who are undeserving, illegitimate and illegal and provide no logical reasons for this transfer of wealth, if you want to call what I have wealth.

I’m incensed at the general idea that those who are not citizens of this once great country have rights that I no longer possess and I am livid that because of my views, many want to curtail my right to express those views and have successfully diminished my rights of Free Speech.

I’m aggravated over a few screaming and irrational voices controlling the national conversation and would like to scream myself but I have a job to keep, a family to feed and I know that if I were to speak my mind, my job would be in jeopardy…Why can they scream, riot and get in my face?  Do they have jobs, families, responsibilities, do they care?

Why is it that so many run to the streets causing mayhem, blocking traffic and access without consideration of those who chose to work, chose responsibility and act to support a system that allows them to demonstrate?  That makes my head spin. 

There is a phrase that should be read by every American that can read.  It is prominently posted and within easy reach, everyone has access to these words.  Most, however, fail to understand the words and have over time stopped trying to understand, most do not even know it exists. 

 

On every coin minted is the phrase “E Pluribus Unum” it is our country's motto, it means:  “Out of many, one”, meaning that out of the many that make up America, we can become one. Becoming one in purpose, in liberty and freedom is the process of becoming American.  From a variety of backgrounds, cultures, languages, and customs we have all come together and under the mantle of  “An American” we live freely and richly all trying to pursue their chosen path of life.  “E Pluribus Unum” is our reminder of what we can become when we understand our common goals of freedom.

The left is attempting to alter this motto and with it our liberty.  The French wanted liberty as well but failed in the simple execution by sacrificing that liberty for equality, thinking that equality leads to Liberty.  We are not Equal, except in our liberty to pursue a life of our choosing.   I challenge all to find two people who are equal without one of them sacrificing their potential for the other.  That sacrifice is an option but an individual choice, not a mandated demand. 

I am most despondent in relation to our Countries shifting morality and the distancing from that simple phrase.  If we fail to pursue liberty and instead choose equality as our goal we will fail at both.  “E Pluribus Unum” is the constant reminder that differentiates America from the rest of the world.  We can be different, we can be ourselves, we can be unique but we can only remain Americans if we adopt the stance of liberty as an individual right and forsake the illogical premise of equality.

Think about it, you may have some similarities with others but in nothing are we equal.  Your differences are what make you, you.  In order to establish equality, the liberty of many would have to be taken away.  Disregard the liberty of some and the liberty of all is impossible.

Communism, Socialism and most dictatorships force their victims to adhere to strict rules and behaviors that instill an overall minimum “equality”.  Very few rise to the top, while most suffer near the bottom.  They feign equality but cannot choose to do as they please, that was taken away when liberty was replaced by sameness.

In Modern Socialism, the services available to the people are much higher and more varied but the logical premise of individual liberty is forsaken and forgotten by both the people and the government.  You may have a temporary increase in services but the overall premise of socialism or communism is just as real.  The need for usurious taxes overshadows the individual drive to succeed, replaced with a universal attitude of mediocrity.   

Europe has fallen prey to this governmental ploy and many Americans are looking hopefully that our government will emulate the policies of higher taxes, less individual responsibility, less opportunity for more routine and marginal services.  Germany is an exception to date but their momentum is driven by governmental controls that have been sold to and purchased by its people.  In the reality of socialism, expansion can only be sustained through the expansive tactics of supported capitalism, a few at the top make billions while the many rely on the services provided by the government, that is not liberty, that is a slow burn to slavery.  Enslaved individuals are the most equal of us all.

If you’re Angry like me, you need to vote for what is right (pun).  You need to remain active in your pursuit of what is “good” and instill through your good works the ideas that liberty, not equality should be our triumphant song.  Other tunes can be played and sung but in relation to the topic at hand, if you sing for equality then your repertoire will be limited and monotonal. 

It is only through liberty that we can all sing the songs of our hearts and only with liberty will our songs have any chance of willing acceptance.  Not all songs will be welcome, which is the risk of freedom.  If your song is not accepted, would you force others to listen to it, mandate that your tune is played on the radio or sung in public?

We should all sing the songs of our hearts and revel in a country that allows our expression but fight against the desire by so many to stop certain voices because they don’t like the tune. 

I am mad but I am also logical and rational, I know the difference between right and wrong and I know what the Left is doing is wrong.  It’s wrong for me, it’s wrong for you and it’s wrong for America.  Vote for the RIGHT, any other vote is Just Wrong.

The Inevitable WAR

The call of,  “can’t we all just get along” as originally voiced by Rodney King, during the 1990’s riots in LA were a swan song of sorts and one that is being replayed over and over on the news.  The hope is to convince those of us who have developed a thick skin to accept the cry for compromise from those who have nothing to offer.

If I’ve already lost you then you either don’t understand or simply don’t care.  But in the face of fairness and compassion let me explain: During the desperate attempt to alter the course of the Supreme Court the Left pulled out all the stops and went after Brett Kavanaugh with a vengeance. So rancorous and so vile were the attacks on Judge Kavanaugh that the entire Senate and country was embroiled in the fiasco that showcased the vile underbelly of the Senate Democrats.  The confirmation process used to be fairly simple with both sides asking probing questions but knowing that the right of a President to fill a vacancy was generally rubber-stamped by both sides of the aisle.

But now the process has allowed very specific ideologies to be revealed and with them the true nature of the LEFT and a forced acceptance of the new RIGHT, if they are to maintain their control of Congress.

What is interesting is in the response to those manifestations, is in the need to rewrite what was said and the need to alter the definitions of the terms used to assuage the impact of the original utterance, or in other words, the left had to seriously backtrack and lie about what was said.  

On September 25 Chuck Schumer said that Kavanaugh “had no presumption of innocence…”

This revelation by the Left is telling in a number of ways.  First, it states emphatically that the position of the Left is to deny the fundamental tenet of Due Process, everyone is innocent until proven guilty.  

Second, it demonstrates a serious lack of patriotism from the standpoint of a willingness to set aside this fundamental law.  In that statement, that was echoed by others during the hearings, the expediency and willingness to alter the Constitution are evident and disturbing to those who revere not only the words but the stability of those words in framing a legal system that gives preferences to the accused until evidence is brought forth to corroborate the accusation.  

ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (“the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies”).  

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 11, states: "Everyone charged with a penal offense has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty …” This is in relation to a trial but the logical interpretation includes life in general.  Where would our society be if this were not the way?

Senator Mazie Hirono  of Hawaii stated that she “doesn’t believe in the presumption of innocence for conservatives.”  You really have to ask the question of why Republicans or literally half of the United States do not deserve the same protections as the other half.  

Dr. Suess, “When the Star-Belly Sneetches had frankfurter roasts

Or picnics or parties or marshmallow toasts,

They never invited the Plain-Belly Sneetches

They left them out cold, in the dark of the beaches.

They kept them away. Never let them come near.

And that’s how they treated them year after year.

The beginning of Prejudice starts with separation, it starts with exclusion or privilege.  When Hitler began his forceful takeover of Germany his first victims were the Jews. He started by controlling small things and then controlled their very lives.  It starts with a small star on the arm.

If what Senator Hirono is said was true, Those were her words, recorded for all to hear, what is her justification for not allowing the same constitutional rights to Republicans?  I can’t wait to hear the answers…

Beyond Due Process and the presumption of innocents, the issue of Free Speech is another issue attacked by the Left.  They claim to uphold free speech but routinely ask their followers, their constituency, to pursue and confront the Right, disrupting their ability to assemble, their right to peacefully interact socially and have through intimidation, fear and numbers disrupted the ability to speak freely.

It seems as though the only free speech the left wants to allow is speech they agree with.

Kyrsten Sinema, who is campaigning for Jeff Flake's soon to be vacant seat has a very telling position.  On one hand, she claims to be an ardent supporter of immigration control but has stated (again it can be verified), that the immigrants who died in the Arizona Deserts while migrating to the US should be viewed as just as important as those who died in Iraq defending our country. Regardless of how you feel about the Iraq war, the soldiers did sacrifice their lives for this country.

Her views are not unusual for the Democratic Party.  The Left has a position of redefining immigration and in the redefinition is the abolishment of our border security, ICE.  Again you may not agree but in that disagreement you’ve taken a stance away from the rule of law and into the variable of “living and breathing constitution” a document that changes and evolves.  

This scenario is not favored by those who want to maintain our rules and our rights.  Our belief is that those rights are embedded in our foundational principles that were formed to sustain our rights and our privileges.  Asking us to negotiate those principles with the Left is impossible. Any form of negotiation requires one party to give up a portion of their beliefs in order to satisfy the other party and their expectation.  But in this case, giving up even a portion of our foundational belief weakens the entire substructure that is the United States.

The other issue is the Morality of what we on the Right believe.  Our beliefs are based on Morality, an unchanging and foundational principle of action and behavior, although not always followed the dismantling of those morals will result in a complete collapse of our way of life.  How can one with an adopted morality negotiate with those who have no such belief? Morals on the left are subject too, reliant on or depending on what is currently the motivation of the morality, that is not a moral principle, that is moral relativism.  

If your belief system is relativistic and mine is moralistic the simple query of negotiation becomes extremely problematic, not for those who subscribe to relativism or are accepting of a sliding scale of morality but to those who hold fast to principles and standards.  

My challenge is to support your position, uphold your ideology without name calling, without screaming or without forcing someone off the stage but through simple rhetoric, listening and evidentiary dialogue.  I will provide my view with evidence and you do the same. When we can compare the evidence and discuss the conclusions of our views perhaps then I will be open to a discussion and I might even be open to the consideration of negotiating.

A little-known truth about Abraham Lincoln, He was willing to do almost anything to avoid the horrors of war.  He knew of the devastation to the country and stated that he would allow almost any compromise to keep the country from war.  That included allowing slavery to continue within the states of the South. He understood that war would destroy our Nation but he also knew that there was little he could do to prevent it, he tried but the LEFT, yes the LEFT, would have none of it. They forced Lincoln's hand and moved rapidly toward WAR. The rest is history, a history that we have not learned, except that the LEFT again is moving in that direction and it is not about how we negotiate or compromise but how strong we are in our convictions to save this Constitution and Republic.

Me Too Selfishness

The value of the Me Too Movement has been reduced by the outcry to those who lend their support exclusively to the cause of women and fail to regard the issues that plague us all.  In no way do I want to minimize the struggles of those who have been abused, their issues are real, their fight against those who oppress and demean are real but in that fight, many have forgotten that others share in these tragic circumstances that we all call life.

When one issue dominates the life of a person, as the Me Too Movement has, the scope of that singularity diminishes the overall view and connectedness of life in general and blinds the eyes of empathy by the very act of this selfish endeavor.  They are unable to see beyond the one chosen issue and become incapable of sharing in-depth relationships except for other single modality believers like themselves.  Without empathy, they are unable to recognize the others that struggle to battle the demons that invade all of our lives.

The Me Too Movement has blamed all men for the issues of a few and by so doing have alienated their most ardent supporters, Men. 

Truth be told, Men and Women are different.  It is within those differences that the connectedness is formed.  Men cannot exist without Women and Woman cannot exist without Man.  Regardless of what is said or practiced the biological variances between the male and the female require us to coexist.  

Men, in general, are designed to want women, to pursue them, to want to please them, support them as they have done since the creation of mankind.  This biological process is not perfect and demands that men learn to control their desires, learn to uphold the standards that are present within our consciousness for the express purpose of establishing a familial bond, a bond that is impossible without women.  Men and women must work together for the unified purposes of both.  The Me Too Movement pulls men and women apart.

There is a level of extreme selfishness in the movement to exclude, not just with the Me Too but with all practices that promote one over another or attempts to define or rename the innate identities that we are all born with. 

Of course we have the right to choose or become whatever our hearts tell us to pursue but when that drive includes the forceful acceptance by those not changing then the movement becomes exclusionary and inherently selfish as it legislates the norms of the past into non-descript versions based on opinion, or desire, never considering the effects of their new norms will have on civilization and society in general. 

Recent events have made it abundantly clear that an accusation is paramount to evidence and Due Process.  The victim, in this case, should be heard but only to the point of her evidentiary profile holding some form of promise.  Of course, she and all who feel abused should be heard but beyond hearing the need to show some proof is essential if we are to maintain a lawful society.

The Me Too Movement has promoted a policy that “all women need to be believed”. Even simple belief requires some evidence for that belief to flourish.  Some indication, some form of corroboration is essential and is the basis for our Constitutional Laws.  If the purpose is to uphold those laws then proof must be the foundation for a cause.  If the purpose is not to sustain the law but to change the law then we have a different scenario altogether. 

If the law is wrong and all accusers should be believed without proof and that is your goal, then your goal also includes disavowing the constitution of the United States.  That might be the goal of the Me Too movement, to change the very foundation of who we are and to use one issue to alter the lives of everyone else, just because they want what they want and they want it now…

This same attitude exists in a variety of exclusionary groups.  Some of these groups are a single issue group, like the NRA, their goal and purpose is to protect the 2^nd amendment.  Abortion rights groups exist to secure the rights for an abortion.  There are white supremacist groups that want to secure the rights of white America and Black supremacist who want to do the same for their racial preference.  The list of groups is lengthy. 

I have my own ways of distinguishing between the various groups that dot the political landscape and I have to admit it’s based on my political ideology which happens to support the original constitutional powers and bill of rights.  Groups like White Supremacist fall into the category of subversive to the Constitution as they want to enforce racial divisions and alter the laws and rights for those who are non-white.

The Me Too Movement would also fall into the same category due to their exclusionary tactics of dealing with men equitably and the overshadowing process of victims’ rights over others rights, and their fundamental desire to change the way Due Process is upheld

Side note:  A victim is:  a person harmed, injured, or killed as a result of a crime, accident, or other event or action, we are all victims to one extent or another. 

Some environmental groups, some political groups, and many others fall within the subversive tactics currently espoused by the Left to undermine what we have for the singular purpose of altering the foundational principles set by our Constitution.  I am a strong believer that our Constitution is the best this world has ever produced.  It is not perfect but it’s closer than we have ever had in the history of humanity. 

I publicly denounce the selfish actions of others as they destroy the lives of those they attack.  I applaud those who fight against these sexual, abusive and horrific incursions but I do not support the alternative of following a selfish motivation, like the Me Too cause to cure the selfish motivation of others.

 Selfishness is the issue, it is the reason to disavow association with any group that is singular in purpose and has the goal of changing or updating or altering the Constitution to fit their selfish desires.