Archive for the ‘Uncomfortable Truths’ Category

by baldilocks

From a recent conversation:

Them: “I didn’t vote for President Obama either time. You know that. But I like him.”

Me: “Really?”

Them: “I can’t stand Trump! I know you’re on the Trump Team.”

The Trump Team? We’re on teams now?

Me: “I’m not on the ‘Trump Team.’ I’m on the side of our country. And President Trump has done many good things for it.”

Them (scoffs): “What has he done?”

Me: His policies have brought about lower unemployment. Black unemployment is at its lowest since …”

Them (interrupts): “NO, IT’S NOT! IT’S THE SAME AS IT WAS WHEN OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT!”

That’s when I knew I had to compose this post. But before I did, I created a page containing links to my many posts during the 2016 presidential campaign in which I expressed skepticism about Donald Trump’s intentions. In short, I thought he was playing conservatives and was in cahoots with Hillary Clinton to get her into the White House.

There are a lot of links on that page, so if you don’t have time to read them, don’t worry. But, I don’t believe in hiding my errors.

Also on that page are indications of my evolution into becoming a supporter of now President Trump.

Do I like him? It’s a question that does not matter. He’s not my friend or my boss. He’s not going to marry into my family nor will anyone in my family marry into his. I like that he is mostly good for our country, I like that he wants that which is good for it, and I like that he isn’t all talk.

I could post the many forms of beneficial action which President Trump has taken, but I want to focus on the most recent topic since the majority of my American family lives in the South and Southwest: Illegal immigration.

Yes, I’ve ranted about it before but, as I type this, we are seeing the beginning of results of this president putting Mexico’s feet to the fire.

Mexico has long been allowing MILLIONS of citizens of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras to walk through its southern border and sojourn through its land en route to the United States.

And why wouldn’t Mexico allow this? Why the flock not? Hey, it’s a chance to shake down these people, rape them, rape their children and turn them into drug mules. And, just spit-balling here, it’s also a chance for Mexican banks to get their hands on monies belonging to international organizations like Pueblo Sin Fronteras (PSF). The Chicago-based PSF has been at the forefront of bringing Central Americans through Mexico to the United States since 2008.

One thing: this flood of illegal aliens has been nothing but a hindrance to the well-being of Americans who are black.  Did I mention that the person I was talking to is black?

But what really got to me was the notion of Barack Obama’s “likability.”

I didn’t want to ask why this person likes the former president because we were already past the point of reasoning together. But I tried to think of what was likable about Former President Obama versus the things that would cause a person to dislike President Trump. Of course, that didn’t take long.

One president talks in a calm, even manner. He’s youthful, slim and has close-cropped salt-and-pepper hair. He will compliment you and try to assuage your doubts.

The other president is old, a little overweight, and funny-looking; that hair, though. And he speaks bluntly and will hurt your feelings.

It would be easy to like the “likable” one, if we didn’t also know that, as a state senator, he voted against saving babies who are born following botched abortions.

… if he hadn’t said that wouldn’t “punish” one of his own daughters with a baby, if one of them had become pregnant before age 18.

… if we didn’t know about Benghazi

… if we didn’t know about Operation Fast and Furious.

… if we didn’t know what he did for Iran.

(If I listed everything that President Likable did to harm this country and its people, this post would be endless.)

But, because he fornicated us with a smile, he’s likable.

Conversely, it’s okay to dislike the one who does almost everything alleged conservatives say they want and who, among many other things, is executing effective action to secure this nation’s borders and strengthen its economy.

Fact is, most people will accept tyranny if the tyrant blows smoke up their a**es.

And will hate the harsh one with the old man hair;  the one who tries to fix things.

Even the things they care about.

Even while they are prospering.

Thinking about this, I’m glad that Jesus never told His followers to like their neighbor as themselves, since I spend a lot of time disliking my neighbors — even the ones that I love.

Even the ones who are unable to discern friend from foe or good from evil.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow her on FacebookTwitterMeWeand Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar or hit Juliette’s!

Andrew Yang

by baldilocks

“Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.

“So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full.

But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing,

so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

— Matthew 6:1-4

But, then, there are other schools of thought on this matter.

New York entrepreneur and Democratic 2020 [POTUS] candidate Andrew Yang wants to implement a system in which a government-run mobile app rewards Americans with “digital social credits” (DSCs) for good behavior.

Americans would receive DSCs under Yang’s system for things such as “participating in a town fair,” “fixing a neighbor’s appliance” or “tutoring a student,” his presidential campaign website explains.

“As individuals rack up DSCs, they would have both a permanent balance they’ve earned over their lifetime and a current balance. They could cash the points in for experiences, purchases with participating vendors, support for causes, and transfer points to others for special occasions,” Yang states on his website.

“As their permanent balance gets higher, they might qualify for various perks like throwing a pitch at a local ballgame, an audience with their local Congressperson or meeting their state’s most civic-minded athlete or celebrity.”

What could go wrong?

Yang’s social credit plan bears some similarities to the social credit system implemented by China’s authoritarian government.

Every citizen in China is assigned a social credit score that determines whether they can buy plane or train tickets.

Unlike the Chinese system, Yang’s plan does not include using digital social credit for punitive measures.

Emphasis mine. Such an app probably wouldn’t have the ability to dish out the type of punishment that the Chinese government does. However, wouldn’t it be interesting for such an app to contain a shaming measure for “bad behavior” — eating at Chick-Fil-A or supporting a pro-life organization, for examples?

Bad behavior could earn the offender a shame-swarm on Twitter or, perhaps, a visit from that chapter of ANTIFA which last seen paying call at Tucker Carlson’s house.

Surely, such a feature bug would never be built into this app. Surely not. (Insert side-eye here.)

Leave it to a Democrat politician to creep us all out. And, unlike Representative-elect Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, this one appears to have more than a few IQ points. Even creepier.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

by baldilocks

Every now and then, the Left tells you [JAO: Tweet has been delete] what its ultimate goal is.

I’ve said for some time that Leftism’s success requires the earth’s rapid depopulation and that nearly all the Left’s advocacy is geared toward that end: radical feminism — which tends to alienate men and women from each other — homosexual and transsexual indoctrination of the very young; and, of course, abortion.

These advocacies are necessary for the depopulation goal because the Left’s old methods — used by Mao, Stalin, Hitler, King Leopold of Belgium, Pol Pot, etc. — were too alarming. Such methods have a tendency to energize the opposition and their allies — that is, those who would forcefully object to, say, being forcibly relocated to a G.U.L.A.G. The new methods are much more insidious.

The special thing about Bill Gates’ notion that there are too many people in Africa is his lack of self-awareness and historical perspective. Has Gates — a prime mover of the Organized Left — been too busy storing up his treasures here on earth all this time to even have a cursory awareness of the Trans-Saharan Slave Trade, The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, or the European Colonization of Africa?

I bet that he does know about these events and their implications. That’s the sickening part.

Here in the United States, it is well-known that Planned Parenthood has long had a huge presence in black neighborhoods — the better to entice black women into committing a form of suicide. (Yes, that’s what we have been doing.) My guess is that Gates and those whom he represents dream of a day when the organization can have a similar footprint across the water.

If that happens, I’d say that Margaret Sanger would be smiling were she still here. It’s a safe bet that nothing could make her smile now, though.

Hell, no.

I’d call this the latest in Leftist mob action.

(Thanks to Ace)

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

by baldilocks

No, not that Fisherman. The other one.

The power to tax is the power to destroy.

–Daniel Webster, et al.

The 36th president of the United States, Lyndon Baines Johnson, is infamous for many things.

Most domestically notable are two programs: the Great Society and Medicare. Both programs can arguably be viewed as bait to Americans. Bait for what? Luring the poor into government dependence, luring the elderly into the same, and luring the descendants of all into catastrophic debt. This debt applies both individually and nationally.

However, I was fascinated to discover that these programs were not LBJ’s first forays into hooking groups into government control. At The Federalist, Leslie Loftis notes that his first target was the church.

When the federal tax code was written, that the government couldn’t tax churches was assumed. For one, at the beginning of the union, only the federal government was prohibited from establishing a religion. The state governments could and did establish churches. They didn’t tax churches, but collected taxes for the church. This stopped after the Civil War and the ratification and subsequent case law of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporated the federal proscription against an established religion to the individual states.

[snip]

Essentially, churches have complied with the exemption requirements of the tax code rather than asserting the right to be free from taxation.

[snip]

To punish and prevent political opponents [including churches] from speaking out against him, [in 1954] then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson, who was in a contentious re-election campaign, pushed through an amendment to the tax code which prohibits “political activity” by 501(c)(3) entities. It is called the Johnson Amendment. Since the prohibition passed, it has only been lightly—and selectively—enforced.

Loftis points to bi-partisan examples of this selective enforcement, but notes that

[m]ost churches, however, tend to err on the side of caution lest the IRS decide to prosecute, either on a whim or as part of a larger political intimidation program much like the one they have run in the past few years against conservative secular organizations.

In other words, due to LBJ’s little trap, most churches yield to fear and/or love of money.

Oh and Loftis also notes that the IRS is the process of composing new guidelines for political activity by tax-exempt religious organizations and churches at the the legal behest of the Freedom From Religion Foundation(!) Aren’t all we Jesus freaks, Bible-thumpers and bitter-clingers looking forward to the passage of such regulations so that we can find out what’s in them?

Back to LBJ. We have had several problematic presidents and the current one seems like the biggest one. But he and his ideological siblings who sit in political office at all levels of government–like Houston Mayor Annise Parker–can look to the politicians of the past and thank them for laying the foundations of tyranny by luring an intentionally under-educated populace into assenting to it.

Politicians like LBJ: Dixiecrat, Reenslaver of black Americans, and Persecutor of the Church.

Quite a legacy, don’t you think?

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!