I want Republicans to be more progressive and less conservative

Posted: December 30, 2023 by navygrade36bureaucrat in election 2024
Tags: , , ,

…about the issues that matter to us.

Republican lawmakers are some of the weakest people in the world. With the notable exception of Donald Trump and a few Senators and Representatives, the overwhelming majority of Republicans elected to office can be relied upon to negotiate like Pope Francis did with Communist China (as in, sell out on all accounts and get nothing), find excuses for not pushing reforms that matter to the voters, and then reliably asking for more money because otherwise the evil Democrats will come to power.

Meanwhile, progressive lawmakers on the Democrat side push everything from porn in elementary classrooms and allowing sexual assault to go unpunished if the person is transgender to EV mandates and our military bankrolling abortion. They get pretty much all of these things, and since Republicans maybe roll back half of them, this means that “progress” is happening.

I don’t want Republicans to be conservative. Conserving means someone focuses on maintaining the status quo. That status quo is never going to happen. Technology changes our environment. Advances in medicine and communication means we can live longer, instantly communicate around the world, and even travel into outer space. It also brings on new challenges. Who would have thought that we’d be asking ourselves what to do with one million frozen embryos babies? Or how we would keep our faith if we lived on Mars?

The typical conservative response is to stick one’s head in the sand and refuse to accept the change. At my church, I have a parishioner that believes WiFi is damaging to your brain and causes cancer. When I installed a campus-wide WiFi network, every young person was ecstatic, but this guy was incensed. He spent an hour verbally blasting me while I was working, finally causing me to express some notably non-Christian phrases and tell him to…well, you can probably guess.

Yet after the network was complete, every young mom could stream the Mass on YouTube in the parking lot when they had to take their screaming 2-year-old out of the church. My church didn’t want a Facebook page until I pointed out that most of our young people were on Facebook, and if we didn’t put a message out, someone else would. Now we have a Facebook page, a solid following, and another way to build our community.

We cannot afford to simply conserve. It is not enough to just reside in the world, protect what we have and hope someone doesn’t come and upset our little piece of the world. Someone IS going to upset it, whether they come rioting in the streets, stabbing people on the train, or coming for your kids in school. Most of our elected Republicans lack the spinal cord to promise anything but a return to what used to be, which is pointless. We aren’t going back to the age of steam, the 1950s, the Victorian era, or any previous time. Birth control pills, social media, and all the recent advances in technology won’t disappear. Instead of wishing for things the way they were in the past, lawmakers need to push for their own version of progress. Since they seem void of ideas, here are my proposals that would make 2024 a far better year for Republican progressives:

  1. 100% free adoption for any unwanted pregnancy. Fund the health care, maternity leave and all adoption costs. We have so many willing families that end up adopting kids overseas due to the legal and funding hurdles associated with adopting American babies.
  2. End Daylight Savings Time. We already have states that don’t follow it. End it in the U.S. permanently.
  3. Eliminate Physical Education in schools, bring back driving class, home economics and shop class. I mean seriously, physical education is a joke. Just drop it already. Kids need to learn how to drive, balance a checkbook, cook a meal, and build things with their hands. Boys and Girls, we are far better off with more girls knowing how to use a power drill and the more boys knowing how to cook basic meals.
  4. Bring back medical billing transparency. This was a pretty big issue that President Trump signed into law, but has gone largely unenforced. We can’t begin to talk about keeping health care costs in check when we have no idea how much it costs in the first place.
  5. Turn Social Security into a TSP-like structure. Congress will rob Peter to pay Paul using Social Security unless its changed into a defined contribution plan.
  6. Cap Congress Senators and Representatives at 30 total years of service. Seriously, do we need someone hanging around for more than 30 years? After 30 years between the Senate and House, folks need to move on to something else.
  7. Legalize marijuana and tax it. It’s fine if the DoD or other places won’t hire if you use drugs, but we’re probably better off just taxing it instead of trying to ban it.

I’m sure there are plenty of other items to add to this list. The point is, rather than trying to return to the mythical “good ole’ days,” we should be pushing for better rules that reflect the reality we are in.

This post represents the views of the author and not those of the Department of Defense, Department of the Navy, or any other government agency.

End of the Year Thoughts Under the Fedora: I’m Old Enough to Remember… Election Shenanigans, What If’s, Days gone by, I SWAT you SWAT they SWAT and two Ghosts of Basketball past

Posted: December 30, 2023 by datechguy in Always look at the bright side of Trump, Blame Trump, election 2020, election 2024, elections, nba, politics, Sports, Uncomfortable Truths
Tags: , , , , , , ,

I’m old enough to remember when, just a few years ago, our friends in the left absolutely and positively insisted that anyone like me who claims the last election was stolen was some kind of conspiracy theorist? And yet now we have not only the story of Colorado by legal decision and Maine by practically a Royal Fiat banning Trump from the ballot.

At the same time and with none of the fanfare of those events we have the republican AG of Georgia who was vital in the cases against Trump suddenly appealing a ruling that he has to testify under oath about the Dominion voting systems that he apparently is going to have an updated security patch install for AFTER the next presidential election.

If things are clean wouldn’t you want to make it a point to note under oath just how clean they are?

I still can’t get over the idea of how much would have been different if the left/democrats simply treated Donald Trump as a normal Presidential candidate and as a normal president and had not bothered all that was done in 2020.

He would be in the final year of his second term and riding off into the sunset. Russia would not be in Ukraine, Hamas would have been kept in check, the US economy would have been booming, the border secure and our strategic petroleum reserve still full

I strongly suspect those who did all they could to steal the last election consider those things as bugs rather than features, less opportunity for graft you see.

Older and wiser heads alas didn’t prevail

Speaking of being old enough to remember I was going through an old backup hard drive I found which had all sorts of goodies from 2015 from me guest hosing Conservatively speaking on WCRN to old podcasts and coverage of all kinds of stuff from all over the country.

One thing I noticed was from a GOP event in NH that included Donald Trump before he had announced. He was leaving the hotel where the potential candidates were and I filmed his departure in passing thinking nothing of it.

Not a single person had a clue what was coming at the time.

I’m also old enough to remember when Swatting was confined to folks like Stacy McCain and the like. 

You might forget that during the Kimberlin years Stacy and others involved in exposing that crowd were swatted. At the time I even went to my local police to warn them of that tactic since I was writing on the subject at the time. People didn’t seem to take it all that seriously.

But now we have members of congress and prominent folks like Johnathan Turley now targets

It would have been nice if this stuff was nipped in the bud early but like the banning of conservatives on twitter and youtube it wasn’t considered important enough to tackle so thus you get more of it

Finally yesterday my wife was working and my sons were engaged elsewhere so I went to my local Longhorn restaurant, sat at the bar, order the Spicy Bites (the single best appetizer value/taste combo that exists at any national chain) opened up Volume 3 of Shelby Foote’s epic Civil War trilogy to Hood defeat at Nashville by Thomas and watched the Boston Celtics play the Toronto Raptors at home.

It was the 2nd day of a back to back and stars Jason Tatum and Kristas Porzingis were not dressed and vet Al Horford were all unavailable so we saw a lot of reserves getting serious playing time. It was an exciting game with an odd finish where the Celtics blew a 20 point lead and had to eek out a win that wasn’t decided till the final second of the game, but two things jumped out at me that I hadn’t seen much of if at all in years

At one point in the 2nd quarter when the Celtics lead was seemingly comfortable I looked up at the screen and was shocked to see an NBA team with practically an all white team on the floor, technically you could call it an all “white” five because the only player of color on the floor was ironically Derrick White (who has really come into his own this season) who frankly is light enough to as they used to say in the old days “pass”.

I suspect it’s been more than half a century since that has been the case but there was something that was even more shocking to me that NBA fans haven’t seen much of these days and that was the play of Center Luke Kornet who instead of launching 3 point shots from the outside was actually hustling to be under the basket to retrieve rebounds and be in a position to be fed for easy layups by a charging White or Brown.

Just a decade or two ago a center playing, well like a Center would not be much of a story but in today’s game it’s practically headline news. I’d like to see more of it because in the end, that tends to pay off.

Note: Our days of Christmas fundraiser is in progress although in fairness it’s been a bit of a bust as we’re still at $2900 & 10 subscribers to go. If you’d like to help change that read more here or donate below:

Alexander Stephens and the Nikole Hannah-Jones’ of the World. Kindred Spirits

Posted: December 29, 2023 by datechguy in culture, race card
Tags: , , , , ,

Bart Maverick: Well it still smells of a con game but there’s too much money in the come-on.

Madame De Chauvrier: So?

Bart Maverick: Madame there isn’t a grifter alive who puts real gold in his “goldbrick” not over a million dollars worth.

Maverick Diamond in the Rough 1958

Now that the Civil war is suddenly in vogue thanks to Nikki Haley’s gaffe it’s worth noting a few things that are basic facts.

The south was fighting to preserve slavery, all you have to do is read the newspapers of the time to know this is true but if you really want to understand this, don’t take my word for it, take the word of the Vice President of the Confederacy Alexander Stephens:

The new [confederate] constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the “rock upon which the old Union would split.” He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. 

Alexander Stephens: Crossroads speech

Keep an eye on that link we’ll be going back to that speech a lot in this post.

What would have been more accurate to say was that the North was not fighting to end slavery, although there were many in the union ranks who believed in its abolition. As Lincoln himself put it in his letter to Horace Greeley:

My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less  whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

This believe it or not is something that even Nikole Hannah-Jones of the phony narrative of the 1619 project understands and states publicly showing that every now and again when a person is trying to sell a salted mine or a fake narrative it’s necessary for a person to make sure there is enough gold in their gold brick or a bit of truth in the come-on to be able to make the sale.

Of course Hanna-Jones likely had little use for the final sentence of Lincoln’s letter

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.

And I suspect that she thought even less of Alexander Stephens words concerning what the founding fathers thought of Slavery and the black race in that same Crossroads speech:

But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the “storm came and the wind blew.”

All emphasis mine

This completely contradicts the narrative of the left on what the founders thought. Furthermore unlike Hanna-Jones, Stephens was in a real position to know what the founders thought not only because the founding of the country was still in living memory at the time of this speech but because he was one of the most educated men of his time:

Take a note of what he says here. He not only states that Jefferson and most of the leading statesmen were opposed to slavery and considered wrong on every count and that said idea was the prevailing idea of the time, but that those founding fathers held that idea based on an assumption of the equality of the races.

It’s important to note here that his was not mere rhetoric. Stephens despite poor beginnings was not only well read in an age were illiteracy was common, but well educated (Top of his college class) a successful lawyer, married to the daughter of a Revolutionary war colonel but at the time of this speech had been an elected representative in the state of Georgia and congress for over a quarter of a century. Few men in the entire nation were in a better position to know the history and the sentiment of the Founders than he.

The real irony is that Hanna-Jones argues for advantages and reparations and special privileges for Blacks in education, and the workplace and by law because they can’t make it in the biased “white” world. Stevens would and did agree completely with this argument:

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

And he not only stated this but he noted that their opponents in the North arguments against slavery would be correct if they did not subscribe to what he considered a false premises of racial equality.

One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails. I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. 

emphasis mine

Is this not the same argument that the Nichole-smith and folks from DEI are making? Blacks must have separate graduations, gays must have separate graduations, they must have separate spaces, all of this is pretty much the argument that Stephens made that Blacks can’t complete on a level playing fields.

George W. Bush called it the: Soft bigotry of low expectation.

I call it “racism”, racism for fun and profit. Well fun and profit for those who make a living off the DEI grift, but for the vast majority of actual students of color who are going to have to make it in a world that doesn’t give a damn about DEI but skills and results It’s a sentence to failure, that ironically will be blamed on racism.

Note: Our days of Christmas fundraiser is in progress $2900 & 10 subscribers to go. Read more here or donate below:

Environmentalists will soon demand that humans stop breathing to save Mother Earth from climate change

Posted: December 28, 2023 by Jon Fournier in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , ,

The title I came up with for this article sounds like the title of either a Babylon Bee article or a Dystopian Science Fiction novel.   Sadly it is an honest appraisal of the mental state of the modern environmental movement, especially in the aftermath of this deeply flawed and scientifically challenged study: Humans may be fueling global warming by breathing: new study (nypost.com)

Humans may be fueling global warming by breathing, a new study suggests.

“Exhaled human breath can contain small, elevated concentrations of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), both of which contribute to global warming,” according to research released last week in the UK  journal PLOS.

The methane and nitrous oxide exhaled by humans make up about 0.1 of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions, the writeup said.

The gases are in addition to the carbon dioxide that humans exhale.

To call this nonsense a scientific study would do grave injustice to real scientific inquiry.  Simple common sense is all that is needed to discredit this pseudo scientific gibberish.  Are methane and nitrous oxide lighter than the nitrogen that makes up 79% of the Earth’s atmosphere, or the oxygen that makes up the majority of the rest?  Wouldn’t these gasses remain close to the earth’s surface where they would not affect the climate in the least?  Aren’t the quantities released by humans awfully minuscule?

Logic and true science have absolutely no value to the political left, where propaganda and belief reign supreme.  Worship of nature has replaced traditional religious beliefs.  Devotion to Mother Gaia is almost universal while humans, especially individual humans, are reviled: The Globalist ‘Final Solution’ – American Thinker

As horrific as the Nazis were, today there is another group who seek a “final solution” even more terrifying: they want to eliminate over 7 billion people from the face of the Earth.  In a 2017 interview, Dennis Meadows, co-author of the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth, said the Earth’s population needs to be “brought back down to one billion.”  The current global population is over 8 billion. 

This sentiment among Progressives is not new at all.

In 1968, the Club of Rome was founded, proclaiming that to be “sustainable,” the Earth’s human population needed to be no more than one billion people.  To distance themselves from the eugenics associated with the Nazis, they re-framed their idea as “population control.”  Aware that their idea would face resistance, they called for global government to enable them to achieve their aims.

Other elites share the Club of Rome’s goals, and many of them trace back to David Rockefeller, head of Chase Manhattan Bank, who was a longtime advocate of global government.  He funded the Club of Rome and was mentor to Canadian Maurice Strong, who ran the U.N.’s Environment Program for over thirty years.  It was through Strong — a Club of Rome member and board member of the World Economic Forum (WEF) — that Rockefeller influenced the U.N., and also Klaus Schwab, head of the WEF.  Longtime Rockefeller friend Henry Kissinger was Schwab’s tutor at the Harvard International Business Seminar for two years, and Schwab credits both Strong and Kissinger as mentors. 

The United Nations has been at the forefront of the depopulation movement for decades and will redouble its efforts thanks to that UK study.

In 1992, Strong introduced the U.N.’s Agenda 21/Sustainable Development, which in 2015 was rebranded Agenda 2030, and Chapter 4 blames population growth for “placing severe [environmental] stress on the planet.”  In 2019, the WEF’s Schwab signed an agreement with the U.N. secretary general to cooperate in accelerating implementation of Agenda 2030’s goals.  So the major international players pushing the “climate change” scheme are ideological descendants of globalist and de-population advocate Rockefeller.

Globalist elites also quietly support the Earth’s de-population in other ways.  For example, the Bill Gates Foundation has pledged $280 million a year from 2021 to 2030 to develop and improve contraceptive technologies, support family planning, etc. (i.e., prevent births).  Gates is infamous for his funding of vaccine testing in Africa, and he (along with UNICEF and the World Health Organization) has been accused of intentionally sterilizing Kenyan children through the use of a hidden HCG antigen in tetanus vaccines.  

But birth control and abortion are a long, slow process for eliminating what is now a 7-billion-people “excess” in the eyes of the de-population globalists.  Mass starvation is faster and more effective, and Agenda 2030 will achieve that.  Read it here, but look beyond the rhetoric to recognize what banning fossil fuels and fertilizers, restricting agricultural emissions, eliminating cattle, etc. will mean in practical terms. 

Does it take monsters to deliberately starve over 7 billion people?  Or just “terrifyingly normal” men like Aurelio Peccei, an Italian industrialist, or Alexander King, a Scots chemist, the co-founders of the Club of Rome?  Or like Bill Gates or Ted Turner, who’ve been buying up productive U.S. farmland to prevent the growing of food?  Or like the “environmentalists” willing to destroy Western civilization through Net Zero to “save the planet”?  Or like Klaus Schwab, the stereotypical middle manager, who would rather this free and unpredictable world be more organized and tidy?  These are the “men in suits” Lewis warned about, who have anointed themselves worthy of deciding the fate of the world.

Older Entries
Newer Entries