Tag Archives: GOP

ALABAMA – MEET YOUR NEW SENATOR, DOUG JONES

Yes, one of the deepest red states in the union, one of the most intense pro-life states in the union, and one of the most evangelical states in the union elected its first Democrat senator in twenty-five years. All the pundits predicted a Roy Moore win, even though Judge Moore was beaten and bruised via a series of accusations from women who said Moore sexually harassed and assaulted them when they were young girls. One of the women claims to have been fourteen when Judge Moore allegedly touched her inappropriately and forced her to touch him. Those pundits were wrong, just like they were wrong in the 2016 presidential election when almost all predicted a Clinton win. Now, Alabama has Senator Elect, Doug Jones, a liberal Democrat whose stands on the issues align with those of the far left.

The largest county in Alabama, Jefferson County, the county of the city of Birmingham, went for Obama in 2012 and Clinton in 2016. While I expected Jefferson County to go for Doug Jones, I never expected the gap to be as wide as it was….68% Doug Jones to 30% Roy Moore. In my county of residence, Shelby county, just south of Jefferson, and a conservative/Republican stronghold, Moore was on top, but only 56% to 42%. Montgomery County, the county of the capital, went for Doug Jones by a margin of 72% to 27%.

What happened in these populous counties? It appears that many Republicans stayed at home. It also appears that many women, who normally vote Republican, in these counties cast their votes for Doug Jones. There were also approximately 22,000 write-ins with the vote differential being between 21,000 and 22,000. It is worth noting that the major metropolitan areas in Alabama put Doug Jones over the top. I think it’s also safe to say that had the accusations not surfaced, Roy Moore would have won hands down and there would have been less than five minutes of coverage on the cable news channels.

Having said the above, Roy Moore doesn’t have a lot of appeal in the larger metropolitan areas of the state. His admirers and supporters are generally evangelical Christians from rural areas. Judge Moore has been involved in Alabama politics for decades and has been quite a colorful character. His folksy style, while appealing to rural GOP voters, doesn’t appeal to many who dwell in the larger metropolitan areas.

I voted for Roy Moore, though I never sung his praises, because I didn’t want to see the slim margin that Republicans had in the Senate get even slimmer. I need for tax reform to get passed, and I want to see a wall built on the Mexican border.

With four Rinos already in the Senate (McCain, Collins, Flag, and Corker), it was already hard to get legislation passed in the Senate, with Doug Jones now there, it’s going to get even harder. I just hope they can get, at least, tax reform passed before the Senator elect is seated. I also hope that Trump’s judgeship nominations are not held up, especially if he has the opportunity to appoint a Supreme Court Justice.

I’ve listened to talking heads to the point that my head is about to explode. Fox News has reported that Donald Trump was in a good mood today in anticipation of tax reform getting through the House and Senate and arriving on his desk. I sure hope Congress will do its job and get this piece of legislation to the president before Doug Jones is seated in the Senate, because he would surely vote against it. It goes without saying that Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, is ecstatic because he won’t have to open an investigation into the allegations.

On the evening of November 25, I was lying on my bed in my Orange Beach, Alabama hotel room, in a fetal position crying. My beloved Crimson Tide had lost to hated cross-state rival, Auburn Tigers. This meant that we wouldn’t be playing for the SEC Championship and we would probably not be a part of the College Football playoff. Instead, we might be going to the Cotton Bowl…the Alabama Crimson Tide in the Cotton Bowl?” After much praying, look at what God did. We did get chosen for the playoffs.

There’s still some stuff going on and developments are taking place. God is in control always. He puts Kings in power, and he removes Kings from power. It’s all in his plan. Let’s all settle down, stay the course, and continue to pray for our country’s leaders and continue to and praise our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Facebooktwitter

COLLEGE-EDUCATED WHITE WOMEN WHO VOTED FOR TRUMP

According to an article written by Jessica Chasmar in the Washington Times dated April 3, 2017, Tina Fey warns female Trump voters: His election will come back to haunt you, comedian and actress, Tina Fey, warned the college-educated white women who voted for President Trump to wake up and resist, because his presidency will eventually bring long-lasting consequences to their lives. Ms. Fey spoke about this, and the presidential election in an interview with ACLU executives during a celebrity Facebook Live fundraiser for the nonprofit this past Friday night (3/31).

Ms. Chasmar quotes the comedian/actress as saying: “A lot of this election was turned by, kind of, white college-educated women who now would maybe like to forget about this election and go back to watching HGTV. And I would want to urge them to, like, you can’t look away, because it doesn’t affect you this minute, but it’s going to affect you eventually.” Ms. Fey went on to say that it’s important for those women not to ignore “what is happening” now that the election is over.

First of all, Ms. Fey only directs her comments to white college-educated women. What about black college-educated women, Hispanic college-educated women, Asian college-educated women, etc.? Does she not feel as though these other college-educated women who may have voted for Donald Trump are not going to be “eventually affected” by his election to the presidency?

Much to my disappointment, there wasn’t much else to the article. I wanted Ms. Fey to address how the election of Donald Trump was going to negatively affect college-educated white women because I’m a college-educated white woman, who voted for Donald Trump, and I’ll also throw into the mix that I’m single.

As a single woman, regardless of education level or race, I have to support myself, which includes planning for my retirement. Donald Trump has promised us tax reform which, hopefully, will lower taxes for everyone, including the middle class, the wealthy, and businesses. It’s definitely in my best interest be allowed to keep as much of my paycheck as possible. Remember, I’m all I have. Furthermore, it’s the wealthy, the business owners who create jobs and hire people like me. Wouldn’t it be in my best interest if they got tax breaks also? I would have a better chance of getting hired. And when I do, I have a better chance of receiving improved benefits and salary increases. Squeezing the wealthy and the business owners, like Hillary wanted to do, would just make my chances of being laid off or the diminishing of my benefits greater. President Trump gets the nod on this one.

Also, as a single woman, it’s important for me to feel safe wherever I am…in my home, in my car, while I’m traveling, and while I’m in public places. The immediate past president, Barack Obama, demonized our nation’s local police forces, and Hillary Clinton was on track to continue to do so had she been elected president. During the Obama presidency, there was all sorts of discussion about limiting what the police could do and not do in their efforts to make our communities safer. Having a police force with the power to protect law-abiding citizens like me from the criminal element is essential to my well-being. President Trump and his administration, along with the GOP, are pro-law enforcement, Democrats don’t appear to be on the side of law enforcement. Another nod goes to President Trump.

While we have enough problems with domestic crime in the United States, since 9/11/2001, terrorist attacks on U.S. soil factor in as well. Plus, the Obama administration exacerbated the situation by not only allowing the rise of ISIS, the most brutal organization in the history of the planet, but by minimizing their danger, especially when it comes to attacks in the U.S. And ISIS is not the only Islamic terrorist organization out there. It goes without saying that my well-being is also affected by the state of the U.S. military. The Obama administration, along with most Democrat administrations generally enforce a weakening of our military. Another nod to President Trump.

The same logic can be applied to immigration policies. Allowing illegal aliens, many of them with criminal histories, to pour into the United States, diminishes the well-being of the single woman. Thus, the building of the Mexican border wall and improvement in vetting processes for non-U.S. citizens entering the country, are in the best interest of single-women. The nod goes to President Trump.

As a woman, not just a single college educated white woman, having access to quality health care is very important to her well-being. Obama and the Democrats certain screwed that one up for us. This single, college-educated white woman is working twelve to fourteen hours per day trying to make her small business not only profitable, but prosperous so she doesn’t have to depend on the government. In short, I want to make money. Unfathomably high health insurance premiums and deductibles forced on us by the Obama administration and the Democrats, with the same to look forward to in a Hilary Clinton administration is not helping women. In fact, it’s not helping men either.  The nod goes, once again, to guess who.

It’s a rare happening for liberals to actually take a break from hurling epithets and fraudulent accusations at those who disagree with them; and actually discuss relevant issues. When they do, they may bring up the equal work for equal pay topic regarding women allegedly being paid less than men for supposedly equal work. Legislation preventing this sort of discrimination was passed in 1963. I have written much on this topic in the past and won’t re-hash here, except to refer you to the previous paragraph where I sited that it was in a single woman’s best interest for taxes to be lower for everyone so that potential employers will prosper, resulting in better raises, benefits, etc. If a woman should find herself in an unfair situation, having a robust economy where jobs with better pay and benefits are available, certainly benefits her. Another nod to President Trump.

Even though Tina Fey was directing her comments toward white college-educated women, and I focused on single women in this piece, I don’t understand why she didn’t include other women. Why would it be any different for them? After reading this story in several other outlets, CNN and USA Magazine were the only publications that bothered to elaborate. And then, their elaborations didn’t amount to much. In fact, CNN only indicated that Ms. Fey remarked that the gains made by women over the last 100 years were under attack. And to that I say, “Exactly which of those gains are under attack?”

Ending this article feeling confused shouldn’t be a surprise to me. This college-educated white woman is a deplorable uneducated redneck. But wait…if Trump supporters are deplorable uneducated rednecks, I think Ms. Fey is the one confused.

Facebooktwitter

THE NOVEL, 1984: ARE WE THERE? – PART FOUR

This is the last in a four part series of articles where I have illustrated how our society reflects many of the aspects of the society in the fictional novel, 1984, written by George Orwell. Part one demonstrated how the outer party attempted to “get into a person’s head” and extract his independent thoughts, which were forbidden. Part two mostly dwells with brainwashing and thought control. If the outer party says it, then it’s true. I used racism in this article to illustrate this concept. Part three discusses the concept of newspeak, the fictional language in Mr. Orwell’s novel, used to limit freedom of thought or thought crimes.

The Ministries of Love, Peace, Plenty, and Truth are ministries or agencies in 1984 where all public attention is focused on the figurehead, Big Brother.

The Ministry of Truth is involved with the news media, entertainment, the fine arts, and educational books. Its purpose is to rewrite history to change the facts to fit Party doctrine.

Rewrite history, does this sound familiar? For several decades not, the left has tried to squelch the teachings of certain segments of American history because having to learn certain things might be offensive to certain groups of people. Christopher Columbus, who discovered America, is now ostracized by the left for reasons including, but not limited to the following, according to deathandtaxesmag.com:

  • Columbus’ expedition virtually wiped out the Taino natives.
  • Columbus inaugurated the Age of Slavery in the Atlantic and Americas.
  • Columbus was the pimp of the New World.
  • Columbus and his men tortured the Tainos who resisted slavery.

The left has also proceeded to demonize the founding fathers of this nation and has done its best to see that teaching our children about the founding fathers is kept to a minimum and their flaws, including the ownership of slaves and the advocacy of slavery, is exposed.

In June, 2015, a young man, with the intent to kill, entered a historic church in Charleston, SC and began shooting, killing nine church members who were involved in Bible study. The murderer, Dylann Roof, was white and photos of him with the Confederate battle flag were found on social media. Uh-oh! Liberals went crazy, yelling at the top of their lungs that the Confederate battle flag should be banned, destroyed, with no vestiges of it left on the planet. This included any item containing an image of the flag, even something as small and unassuming as a belt buckle.

When conservatives, including many from the South, tried to explain that the Confederate flag was not necessarily a symbol of hate toward the black race, but also represented pride in one’s heritage, the open-minded, free-thinking, tolerant left would have nothing of it, pontificating that the Confederate battle flag was nothing but a symbol of racism, slavery, and hate. There was only one side and that was the side of the “tolerant” left.

Over the next several weeks following the Charleston shooting, attempts were made to take down statutes of Confederate leaders, including many who fought for the Confederacy during the Civil War. In many places, statutes honoring Confederate leaders been removed, while some efforts have been thwarted and are presently hung up in the courts.

There should be no doubt in anyone’s mind that the left wishes to change history. Thankfully it’s not as easy to do as it was in 1984, the novel.

The Ministry of Truth was also responsible for news and information fed to the party members as well as the proles (non-party members looked down upon by those in government). There was no such thing as an independent media. Freedom of the press was an antiquated obsolete concept that had been done away with in its entirety. While public radio and television, plus government Internet sites represent examples of state-run media, we do still have some remnants of a free and independent press. According to breitbart.com, President Barak Obama, in a speech where he was ripping Fox News, made the following comment: “Speaking of Fox News, the poor, and the way GOP leaders think, we’re going to have to change how our body politic thinks, which means we’re going to have to change how the media reports on these issues.”

The above should horrifically frighten every man and women in this nation. In addition to hinting at the possible elimination of freedom of the press, Obama is also advocating thought control and his words could possibly construed to advocating the elimination of free thinking. This is scary stuff.

1984’s Ministry of Truth is also in charge of eliminating documents, particularly historical documents, which don’t fit the outer party’s political philosophy. Books that do not meet the party’s approval are also eliminated. The ministry has ways of destroying these documents and books whereby no copy can ever be found plus the existence and content of these documents and books are fully eliminated from everyone’s brain.

Another ministry or agency in 1984, the novel, is the Ministry of Plenty. This ministry controlled the food and water supply of the country, Airstrip One, and possibly the entire region of Oceania. The food and beverages were not palatable and were designed only to keep the people alive. The rations doled out could not possibly maximize body and brain function. Could it be that the people were somewhat mind-numbed where independent thought and memory were diminished?

Along with city and state governments, the U.S. government has made head-ways into dictating what Americans should eat. They do it under the guise of proper nutrition and healthy lifestyles. But think about the pitiful school lunches that our schools are serving up to our children. Can these children possibly function mentally and physically with such meager lunches? Could this possibly be the advent of total government control over what we eat?

While this article will be my last in this series, I feel as though I have barely scratched the surface with respect to the parallels of the novel, 1984, and the events and policies of today, events and policies that have been advocated by the left. Is there enough information out there to fill up a novel? Might be worth a shot.

Facebooktwitter

OCCUPY DEMOCRATS, A LYING CORRUPT ORGANIZATION – PART THREE

According to politifact.com, Occupy Democrats is an advocacy group that was created to counterbalance the Tea Party and to give President Obama and other progressive Democrats a Congress that will work with them to grow the economy, create jobs, promote fairness, fight inequality, and get money out of politics. It sounds good, doesn’t it?

Occupy Democrats also has a Facebook page, and most of my liberal Facebook friends are fans of the page.

Of course, I often see posts where my liberal FB friends have shared memes from the Occupy Democrats Facebook page, and those memes are almost always wrong about everything. Here is another example.

On July 17, 2015, Occupy Democrats shared a meme on Facebook stating: “House Republicans just passed a bill that makes it legal for single mothers to be fired by their employers.”

House Republicans did not pass a bill. It was only introduced.

According to Politifact, the meme was shared more than 60,000 times, suggesting a lot of people found the news outrageous. Politifact determined through a cached image of Occupy Democrats’ website and a Huffington Post article that the meme’s underlying beef was with the First Amendment Defense Act, HR 2802, introduced by Republicans on June 17.  HR 2802 was a conservative response to the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize gay marriage.

At the time of the meme, the bill had not been passed by the GOP led House. Rather, it had only been submitted to a committee for consideration.

Some Americans saw the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize gay marriage as a potential affront to their religious beliefs under the First Amendment.

The authors of the First Amendment Defense Act attempted to address how the court’s decision could affect religious institutions in a situation that came up during oral arguments. Justice Samuel Alito asked in April whether a religious school could lose its tax-exempt status if it opposes same-sex marriage, and the U.S. solicitor general, who was arguing for same-sex couples said, “It’s certainly going to be an issue.”

The First Amendment Defense Act mentions this exchange in its text and proposes that it should be illegal for the federal government to impose tax, grant or benefit sanctions on organizations that oppose same-sex marriage because of religious or moral convictions.

Since the bill does not mention women at all, where does the concern for single moms losing their jobs come into play?

Politifact goes on to indicated that the part which worries some people is section 3(a), which reads: “Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, the Federal Government shall not take any discriminatory action against a person wholly or partially on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief of moral conviction that marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or that sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

Emily Martin, vice president and general counsel of the National Women’s Law Center, pointed to the last part about sexual relations being reserved for the marriage of one man and one woman. The wording “can absolutely” be applied to women who are pregnant outside of marriage, she said.

The introductory clause “notwithstanding any other provision of law,” Martin said, seems to indicate that FADA would overrule other existing laws on this issue.

Usually, when an individual feels that she has been discriminated against, she has to file a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The agency would then investigate the concern and give a ruling or provide the complainant with a “right to sue.”

However, Martin argued that, in an extreme scenario, it’s possible the EEOC would not have jurisdiction in cases under this bill since the FADA specifically forbids the federal government from taking discriminatory actions against a person.

Samuel Estreicher, director of the Center for Labor and Employment Law at New York University’s Law School, says he would not read the bill as repealing Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which protects against sex discrimination). Still, he said it could use some clarification.

The bill’s primary sponsors in the Senate and the House say the bill is not supposed to target single mothers. In a phone interview, Representative Raul Labrador (R) from Idaho, said the First Amendment Defense Act deals exclusively with possible federal government actions against employers that do no support same-sex marriage. The Federal government would not be able to use tax or other federal sanctions, such as withdrawing benefits or tax-exempt status, against employers who oppose same-sex marriage. The federal government would not be able to use tax or other federal sanctions, such as withdrawing benefits or tax-exempt status, against employers who oppose same-sex marriage.

Labrador also said that the bill does not address employer-employee relationships, and if an employee felt that she was discriminated against, she would still be able to seek recourse through employment protections through the EEOC or Title VII. Labrador then indicated that he would make the bill clearer.

Politifact indicated that it did reach out to Occupy Democrats, but did not hear back.

In their conclusion, Politifact indicated that there were big flaws with this claim. According to some quick googling, the bill has never gotten out of committee. Thus, stating that House Republicans just passed a bill… is a lie. Furthermore, the bill does not legalize the firing of single mothers. Instead, it deals with discriminatory actions that the federal government should take against religious institutions that oppose same sex marriage. Politifact rates the claim as false.

To this conservative political blogger, this claim is more than false, it is ridiculous. I can’t really connect the dots. Furthermore, in most states, an employer can fire an employee for any reason or no reason at all. When you sign on as an employee, the contract that you sign indicates that both the employee and the employer have a right to terminate the contract.

Having said the above, even though the employer doesn’t have to give the employee a reason for termination, such an action is rare. Companies that did this often would get an unwanted reputation.

Note: This will be the last post in my series illustrating the lies, half-truths, and out of context statements often made by Occupy Democrats. However, I will continue to monitor this site and may report on them in the future.

Facebooktwitter

DEFINITION OF HATER

I’ve often said that it seems the liberals/Democrats change the definition of racism to suit themselves. When they can’t win an argument with a conservative, which is well over 90 percent of the time, they begin hurling insults at you and one of those insults is usually racist, even if your discussion did not even touch upon race. My conclusion regarding this is since the current President of the United States is half black, if you disagree with his policies, you’re a racist.

Well, now it seems that if you disagree with the current President’s policies that you are deemed a hater. I’ve told this story many times and I’ll tell it again and again. When I was a little girl, the cold war was raging and Nikita Khrushchev, the first secretary of the central committee of the Communist party of the Soviet Union, declared to American parents that their children would live under Communism. I didn’t know what Communism was, but knew it was bad. When I was about five, I asked my grandmother about Communism. I don’t remember that much about the conversation, but I do remember my grandmother telling me that here in the United States, if you didn’t like or disagreed with your elected officials, you could say it right out loud. In the Soviet Union and other Communist nations, you couldn’t say bad things about the government. Even though I’m sure that my grandmother talked about free elections and other things, being able to say that I didn’t like what the government was doing stuck with me. As you know, I do exercise that right.

Hate is a powerful emotion and we should not hate. I can remember my mother, whenever I said that I hated someone, would remind me that it was a sin to hate. Instead, Mama told me that I should say that I didn’t care for someone.
I remember all the hate that was directed to former Presidents George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan. When I saw liberals depicting President Bush hanging from a tree, I would wince. When I saw the left depicting President Reagan as a clown, I would wince also. But you go on with your life, it’s politics. Now, it seems that if you disagree with the current President on policies that you are automatically dubbed a hater.

In a Daily Kos article dated January 4, 2015, Bernard Pliers wrote an article entitled, “Dear Obama Hater – You Just Wasted a Decade of Your Life.” I’m not sure if this article was directed at someone like me. I do not agree with this President politically and there is not a single issue on which I agree with him. I believe that he is a racist, a bigot, an Islamic terrorist sympathizer, and a socialist bordering on communist. I agree 100 percent with Rudy Giuliani that this President does not love the United States of America and has as his ultimate goal, the substantial weakening of this country. He is certainly not a President to all Americans and doesn’t care at all about the middle class. But, he might be fun to party with.

With regard to the above cited article, Mr. Pliers trashes conservatives and Tea Party members and indicates that they have wasted ten years of their lives and have nothing to show for it. Mr. Pliers goes on to chastise those who he deems Obama haters, indicating that while they wasted time hating the current President, they could have accomplished many things such as getting a college degree, writing a book, running their first marathon, and learning a foreign language. Now, I earned a college degree quite a few years before the current President was first elected and inaugurated. But I did write book during his administration and hope to have several more while he is still in office. I’ve also started a business, even though, according to the current President, I didn’t build it.
Then Mr. Pliers infers that we conservatives wouldn’t have done any of those things anyway because we were waiting for impeachment and for the GOP candidates to “take off the gloves.”

Mr. Pliers, there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a political junkie, nothing wrong with keeping up with current events, nothing wrong with disagreeing with your elected officials and letting them know it. In fact, that’s what our country’s forefathers intended us to do if we were to preserve our freedoms. Mr. Pliers, I’m not going to accept that the ACA was jammed down our throats utilizing every legislative trick the liberals could possible use. I’m not going to accept that this President or any President can, with the stroke of a pen, grant benefits to illegal aliens, change laws passed by Congress, shut down commerce, etc. I don’t like executive orders and think that they should be used sparingly, not when the President knows that something can’t get through Congress.

Furthermore, Mr. Pliers, I have a computer, in fact, I have three, and I have word processing software. I intend to make my feelings about our government officials known, whether I agree with them or not. I also hope to convey knowledge along the way. As Americans, we must hold our elected officials accountable, we must not accept everything they say and do. We must question all of them. Anyone that runs for public office should be prepared to answer questions and be held accountable. In fact, he or she should expect to be grilled and should welcome it.

You ended your article with this: “And the next time there is a GOP president, just remember that there will be fatal embassy attacks under the GOP president, just like the dozens of fatal embassy attacks that occurred under previous Republican presidents. Except Democrats won’t be working themselves into a frenzy of conspiracy theories when it happens, they won’ be cheerleading for the terrorists, and they won’t be trying to overthrow the U.S. government every time something happens.

Yes, Mr. Pliers, there will probably be additional embassy attacks, but it is my hope that any President, if embassy attacks occur under his or her watch, will be engaged and will take all precautions necessary to prevent the attack. If the attack does occur and Americans are killed, call the attack what it is and authorize the appropriate investigations into why the attack happened and how to prevent such attacks from occurring in the future. And then don’t lie to the American people about what actually caused the attack. If the current President and the “then” Secretary of State has been fully engaged before and after the attack and had not lied to the American people, telling them it was caused by a video, I doubt that many people, Republicans or Democrats would have said much of anything.

Conservatives are not cheerleading for terrorists. I don’t know where you got that from, but you are telling a lie. I don’t recall anyone making a prominent case for overthrowing the government. Again, that’s a lie.

Instead of trying to convince people who don’t agree with you, like me, with facts and statistics, you, like other liberals can only hurl insults. There are so many untruths in your article and I have only been able to get to a few of them. Hopefully, I will be able to address them in the future. Meanwhile, I have many other things to do, such as run my business, work on my next novel, and market my just released novel.

Facebooktwitter