Tag Archives: Democrat Party


Microaggression: a subtle but offensive comment or action directed at a minority or other non-dominant group that is often unintentional or unconsciously reinforces a stereotype. The act of discriminating against a non-dominant group by means of such comments or actions. (According to dictionary.com) Also, according to dictionary.com, the term has been around since 1970, and was “coined” by psychiatrist, Chester M. Pierce.

Because I don’t use the term and have no use for the term, I have to look its meaning up in the dictionary to refresh my memory.

I have a friend who is not from the south, and has it in her head that every southerner eats grits three times a day. I’ve indicated to her many times that I’m not a big grits eater, but she always asks me if I’m going to order grits whenever they’re on the menu. She one time ask me if I wanted her grits when they came with the breakfast she had ordered. Could this be a microaggression? I’ll admit it’s a little aggravating, but it certainly doesn’t offend me.

Another time, a fellow southerner asked me if I liked barbecue. Because I don’t like to use the word, “offend,” I’m not going to say that offended me, but it did sort of make me mad.  If you’re from the south, you like barbecue. That’s a given. In fact, I only know of two people on the planet, excluding the vegetarians I know, who don’t like barbecue. Neither are from the south and one of them is dead. Could that be considered a microaggression?

Also, I had a black friend years ago who always wanted to know if I was going to see Jeff Foxworthy (a southern white comedian whose material is about the south). Not being the biggest Jeff Foxworthy fan, my answer was always no. Then one time I turned it on my black friend and asked her if she was going to see him. And guess what? It made her mad that I would even ask her if she was going to see a white red-neck performer.

The above examples are silly, but so is the concept of microaggression in general. And we all know who invented microaggression? The left, of course.

An article from dailycaller.com on September 1, 2017, told of two professors who claim to have discovered a new form of politically incorrect offense called “invisibility microaggressions,” which are said to be even more subtle than regular microaggressions. Their proposed solution for these invisible microaggressions is to get rid of meritocracy. Not knowing what meritocracy meant, I looked it up. The meaning according to dictionary.com: an elite group of people whose progress is based on ability and talent rather than on class, privilege, or wealth. A system in which such persons are awarded and advanced. Leadership by able and talented persons.

The Daily Caller refers to a publication called Campus Reform which reported that a recent study by two professors, Jasmine Mena of Bucknell University and Annemarie Vaccaro of the University of Rhode Island, claimed that they are the first academics to discover that “invisibility” is a form of microaggressions not previously described in feminist academia.

Publishing their findings in the NASPA Journal about Women in Higher Education, these two women claim that the environment-based “invisibility microaggressions” occur when they are among the few or only non-whites in a workplace or communal context. Meanwhile, interpersonal “invisibility microaggressions” are said to hinder non-white people in everyday work roles because their ethnicity or gender is being ignored or because they don’t see other non-white people there.

The professors state that unlike regular microaggressions, which require at least two parties for them to occur, invisibility microaggressions only need for one person to feel invisible in an environment. A long black person among a sea of white faces could qualify as one of these invisibility microaggressions, especially if he or she isn’t singled out for being black. But if that happens, then can it possibly be a macroaggression? When I entered the term, “macroaggression” in dictionary.com, it asked me if I meant “microaggression.”

These women further say that the only way to deal with invisibility microaggressions is for campuses and workplaces to single out minorities and shower them with positive attention, to make them feel less invisible.

The women go on to say, rather than commend them on the merits of their work like any other employee, employers and colleges should deliberately select non-white women for high-profile awards and celebrate them on alumni magazines, newsletters, and other materials. These two women also recommend that campus leaders must be especially vigilant in considering and recommending Women of Color for leadership roles.

I thought the passage and signing into law of the 1963 Civil Rights Act was supposed to render a color-blind society where things like being the only black among all whites or the only woman among all men was meaningless. Guess I thought wrong, or I’m just an unenlightened oaf, a deplorable, an uneducated redneck, a bitter clinger. (Have I left anything out?) That’s what I’ve wanted to see all these years and I thought that’s what everyone else, including the left, wanted to see take place.

I think the left may have wanted the above at one time, also. But what happened? What made the left change? In a generation, the United States of America made great strides in becoming a color-blind society when it comes down to skin color. Racism or any other sin, will never be fully eliminated, of course, until Jesus returns and sets up his 1,000-year kingdom on earth.

Again, why is the left doing an about face from what they were advocating for the past forty years? Like I’ve said many times, it is the Democrats/liberals/progressives who are the read racists in this world. From the moment that the 1963 Civil Rights Act was passed, liberals, while in favor of the legislation, felt that blacks were inferior to white folks and thus, needed hand-outs and help in order to succeed. So, liberals made having children out of wedlock routine by giving single women money for each out of wedlock child they birthed. Furthermore, liberals initiated Affirmative Action because they felt that blacks were too stupid to “make it” in the “white man’s world.” The Democrat party is 100 percent responsible for the problems incurred by blacks, and in my opinion, Democrats have destroyed blacks in America. In their new philosophy of promoting segregation, Democrats/liberals/progressives have not changed their minds about blacks being inferior, they’re just continuing to promote those thoughts through different mechanisms.

Academics Discover New Way to Get Offended: ‘Invisibility Microaggressions’

Again, thanks to dailycaller.com and contributor, Ian Miles Cheong for the information contained in this article.



Monday, January 4, 2016, the first workday of the new year began with a bang. The stock market in China collapsed, causing the Dow, here in the U.S. to drop also. As a result, we’re all a little poorer to begin 2016, an important presidential election year.

An important presidential election year? It seems like every presidential election is more important than any of the previous presidential elections.

That’s so true and the 2016 presidential election is certainly no exception. When the current president was running for re-election in 2012, conservative friends and I felt that the United States could not possibly survive another four years of far left leadership.

Well, here we are, having survived three additional years of far left leadership. Yes, we’ve survived, but how are we actually doing?

Those of us who have to purchase insurance from the Obamacare market place have seen our insurance premiums sky-rocket to the point that we have had to make substantial changes in our life styles. We’ve had to cut back on restaurant meals, travel, clothes, etc. As such, we’re not pumping as much money into the economy. Most of us are holding our collective breaths that we don’t have something catastrophic happen to us because our deductibles are so high that we’re sure to take a hit financially, if called upon to pay that deductible. In fact, health insurance may cause some of us small business owners to have to go back to work just to have health insurance.

Right before our eyes, an evil terrorist group, ISIS, took over the countries of Syria and Iraq as the current president, against the advice of his military advisors pulled American troops out of Iraq. Then the current president called ISIS, JV. The fact is they are the most evil organization on the planet. ISIS has a presence in the United States and has promised to carry out attacks on American soil, killing as many Americans as they can. And what does the current president do? Nothing, absolutely nothing.

Gun Control is trending at the moment with the current president who plans to sign executive orders with provisions, according to al.com as follows:

  • Close gun show loophole
  • Close loophole related to trust and corporate purchases
  • State participation
  • Streamline background check system
  • Lost or stolen guns
  • Mental health services
  • Gun technology
  • Increased personnel, other measures

The second amendment to the Constitution of the United gives Americans the right to own and bear firearms. This amendment was put in by our founding fathers in order that Americans would be able to protect themselves from criminality and tyrannical government, the type of government we live under with the current administration. Furthermore, the current president is not a dictator, though he sure acts the part. He is violating the provisions of the Constitution with his executive orders and should be impeached. And none of what he is doing would have kept the recent gun violence incidents from taking place.

The Republicans still have a plethora of candidates seeking the party’s nomination for president. How it eventually shakes out is anyone’s guess. On the other side, Hillary Clinton will most likely be the nominee for Democrat party. Sadly, there are folks out there who will vote for her. Which Republican candidate(s) will be able to beat her? Sadly, we don’t know if any of them can.

The job market has still not recovered and while unemployment figures are down, many people have simply given up looking for work. Liberals are telling us to accept this as the new norm, which is typical “liberal speak.”

Foreign policy by the president has been a disaster.

We’ve turned our backs on our allies, especially Israel. God has said that he will punish those who turn their backs on his people, Israel. In an article dated October 2012 in shelbystar.com, the author cites Bill Koenig, author of “Eye to Eye” where Mr. Koenig points out that hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and even terrorist attacks have hit American often within 24 hours of calls by U.S. officials for Israel to withdraw from Jewish land.

Hurricane Katrina struck when George Bush forced Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza. Just days after Obama insisted Israel must give up lands it won through military victory with its enemies, some 200 people were killed by a tornado in Joplin, Missouri. Koenig goes on to point out that six of the seven costliest hurricanes in U.S. history followed calls by U.S. officials for Israel to make land concessions in bids for peace with its neighbors, and three of the four largest tornado outbreaks followed such calls.

I truly believe that as Obama continues to widen the gap between Israel and the United States, while seeking to appease those countries which sponsor Islamic terrorism, we will continue to see more natural disasters here in the United States. Of course the liberals will say this is a result of man-made climate change and blame it on Congressional Republicans and Fox News.

Of course, any liberal who reads what I just wrote will be calling me a crazy and other things, though I doubt I will be called anything that I haven’t been already called by the left.

As I conclude my second post of 2016, I’m wondering if we can survive another year of this administration. What is our country going to look like in one year? Will I still be writing articles for this blog in one year? How many more Islamic terrorist attacks will be have taken place on American soil and will the current president continue to tell us not to judge all Muslims by the actions of an isolated few, while blaming all southern white conservative Christians, George Bush, the Confederate flag, and Fox News for incidents of gun violence that may take place or probably will take place?



Within the last ten days or so, liberals have had to take it on the chin. First, a map of the United States was developed that depicted the most racist areas in the nation. Where would most liberals and non-liberals think the greatest concentration of racism would be? The southeastern United States, of course. WRONG! The most racist area in the United States was comprised of a swath of states in the northeast including Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky, and parts of Pennsylvania. This southerner was ROLF (rolling on the floor laughing).

A day or so later, information disclosed from a number of studies indicated that the level of racism in both the Democrat and Republican parties was about the same. To this, liberals responded that we’re all racists and racism is an inherent trait. Nice try libs, and I might accept one of your arguments that none of us are perfect. But for decades, liberals/democrats/progressives have been hurling accusations of racism and bigotry at Republicans and conservatives. Now the libs look stupid.

According to youngcons.com, a conservative news analyst for Fox Cable News, announced that he was gay. In reviewing comments and posts, I didn’t see any negative posts coming from conservatives, but the liberals were demonizing him just they do black conservatives. In addition to the accusations of racism and bigotry that liberals hurl and conservatives, they also hurl accusations of homophobia. Again, the libs are being exposed.

After BHO was sworn in as President of the United States, those who were against his governing philosophy and his policies were deemed racists by the tolerant left. Well, well, well, look what we have in 2015. A black guy is running for the Republican nomination for president, Dr. Ben Carson. It goes without saying that the liberals disagree with him politically and are certainly demonizing him like they do all black Republicans. Since Republicans were called racists for not agreeing with BHO’s policies, should we now call the liberals racists (which is what they are) when they disagree with Dr. Carson? I’d love to rub their noses in it, but whether I do so remains to be seen.

On Monday, May 4, I posted the following virulent piece on my Facebook fan page. The post was in response to the “Draw Mohammad contest in Garland, Texas,” and the billboard in Arkansas that advertised “White Pride Radio.”

“Hey, you liberals/progressives/democrats or whatever you want to call yourselves. If you’re offended by this and/or think it’s racist, IT’S YOUR OWN D**N FAULT! You’ve crossed the line. You’ve made this happen, along with the contest held in Garland, Texas. With your lies, insults, and shrill rhetoric, you have possibly awakened a sleeping giant that is conservative America. You trash white folks (and many of you are white yourselves), you trash the police, you trash Christians, you trash anyone who may have different views than you do. You also refuse to engage in meaningful dialogue and instead, continue to hurl your insults and lies, making a meaningful discussion impossible. You ignore facts and base your actions on falsehoods.
It’s been a rough few days for you libs, hasn’t it? The United States racist map show the greatest concentration of racism in the northeast instead of the south. As a southerner, I’m ROFL! Then there have been some studies that indicated racism is just as prevalent in the Democrat party as it is in the Republican party. Since you’ve screamed to the top of your lungs for decades that Republicans are racists and bigots, you’re looking a little stupid right now; actually a lot stupid.Yes, I’m mad and provoked! The above is not typical of the way I post, but you liberals have driven me to this. Furthermore, I’m sure that I’m not the only conservative who feels this way. Y’all better watch out. As I indicated above, you may have awakened a sleeping giant.”

Majority of the media outlets are in the tank for the democrats and have had the back of this president since he took office. Furthermore, there are many millions of folks who would be considered low information voters. They know very little and what little news they get comes from the networks. If these low information voters have not lost their jobs, have not had major changes to their healthcare, or otherwise suffered as a result of this president’s policies, think he’s doing an okay job and may be likely to vote for Hillary in 2016.

Two weeks ago, a friend who I’ve known for over twenty years indicated that she thought our problems with Iran were over. When she said this, I was speechless. She had been listening to the mainstream media. She also asked me if I was going to support Hillary and she was serious. Actually, this friend is beyond a low information voter, she is a bottom-feeder. When I asked her to visit this blog, she refused, saying that she wasn’t into politics and didn’t want to learn. Scary, and she’ll probably vote for Hillary, not knowing anything about her policies. Thank goodness we live in a state that Hillary won’t carry.

What goes around, comes around. Everything always comes full circle. You reap what you sow. These are sayings with which we are familiar. It looks like the actions of the liberals during the last couple of decades might be reaching up to bit them in their butts.

This president has as his goal to destroy the United States of America as we know it, and there have been times when I thought that he would do the job. Now, there is a glimmer of hope. I still believe in American exceptionalism, and though it might not happen until the eleventh hour, I believe that the good people of this country who believe in the constitution and the vision that our founding fathers had for this country will rise up and snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.



One of the things I indicated that I was planning to do was regularly visit liberal/progressive websites and read some of the articles. And I’ve done that. There’s only one problem. It takes me about three times longer to read an article on a liberal website than it does to read an article of comparable length on a conservative website. I had to read slowly and then re-read it in order to comprehend the message that the author was attempting to convey.

Some liberals might say, “Oh she’s conservative, so she’s an idiot by that alone. Plus, she’s southern, she’s from Alabama, and she’s a Christian. Is there anything you like about lil ole me? That’s okay because there’s probably nothing I like about you either. Other liberals might say that the reason that I take longer to read liberal articles is because I’m not enlightened; instead, I’m an oaf.

I’m not stupid. Every intelligence test/IQ test that I have taken indicates that I have an above average intelligence level. I’m not genius level, though. Having said that, I do have a bachelor’s degree from a major university. I also have a professional certification in insurance. To get that certification, I had to study for and pass ten college level exams. I’m also a Microsoft Certified Professional. Before I left my last employer, I had the job title of Senior Software Engineer.

Generally, I don’t have any trouble reading and understanding anything out there that is published for public consumption except articles written by liberals, many of them academic elites.

But liberals, you claim that the Democrat party is the party of inclusion, tolerance, and a bunch of other stuff. I would assume that you welcome in people of all intelligence and educational levels, but can they read the stuff that you write and understand it? Think about it. Do you really understand what you are writing? When I write something, striving to make it understandable by all, you don’t seem to understand what I’ve written about because after you read something that I’ve written, you start hurling your insults at me and fail to extract the subject of the article. I actually suspect that you know good and well what I’ve written, but know that you can’t win a debate with me, so you start the insults hoping that they will knock me off base.

Speaking of articles where I really had to concentrate to understand the meaning, I read an article late last week in either Salon of Slate. I thought I had bookmarked the article, but I can’t find it. The article was about Ferguson, Missouri and the shooting of an eighteen year old black youth by a white police officer. I haven’t discussed this matter because everyone else has, and I believe that it’s a local matter and should be handled as such. The article gave a definite of white privilege. Of course, it was vague and I don’t remember it. But my take on the article was the author felt that because of white privilege in a situation such as Ferguson, Missouri, the white person should be blamed and subject to punishment no matter what the facts of the case were.  This is, of course, to rectify past wrongs committed against blacks.

This is one of the most ridiculous things that I have ever heard of in my life and was certainly not the vision of the late Dr. Martin Luther King and the early civil rights leaders.

Liberals like to accuse conservatives of wanting to take us back to the 1950s where the woman’s place was in the kitchen and the bedroom and where blacks existed to clean the houses and cook the meals for the white folks.

Now it seems as though liberals want to take us back to times way before the 1950s. Maybe as far back as the Civil War? There’s no doubt in anyone’s mind that if an altercation between a black man and a white man ended in the black man killing or injuring the white man, the black man was at fault and punished. Circumstances or facts of the incident meant nothing.  With taking us way back in history, now any altercation between a white man and a black man will result in the white man being at fault and punished. Is that what liberals want? That article sure made it seem that way.