Traditional Values verses Progressive Liberalism

Traditional Values verses Progressive Liberalism

Kevin Bryant

 

Before I get too deep into this, I want to say I support gay unions but I refuse to acknowledge it by using the term marriage. I fully support and believe in the idea that gay couples should have all rights and privileges of those who are married in the traditional sense.   

 

Gay Unions is a battle of ideas. It’s a battle of which amendment to the United States Constitution really applies. On one hand you have the 10^th Amendment and there is the 14^th Amendment on the other. As America has become more progressive over the years, the 10^th Amendment has been seen more and more as a joke or a nuisance to those who believe in one central governing power and they use the 14^th Amendment to grab power from the people and put it in the hands of federal politicians.

 

If you have not read in full both of these amendments, I highly recommend you do before commenting.

 

The right of the states to govern their people as they see fit verses equal protection under the law. This is the main reason we have such a divide in America. Gay Unions is only one more battle in a never ending string of battles between these two Amendments.

 

The truth is, these two Amendments were supposed to complement one another. It was to be the end all of battles between state’s rights and individual liberty. What is has become is something grey and ugly and tearing apart the nation at its core.

 

Traditional Values verses Progressive Liberalism. That is what the progressives have turned these two Amendments into and the outcome has resulted in a huge power-shift in America from the rights of the states to the one size fits all central power. The 10^th Amendment states that all powers not delegated to the federal government shall be retained by the states. Two specific examples, Marriage License & Driver’s License. Both are issued by the state. Both have privileges attached and restrictions applied by the state. No state shall revoke privileges or deprive anyone in their pursuit of life, liberty or property without due process. Pretty simple right? WRONG!

 

Progressives have been using the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the 14^th Amendment to rob Americans of their liberties for years. Take voting for instance, states have voting laws that meet constitutional standards but liberals have challenged those laws and advocated breakage of those laws because of requirement to produce personal identification and proof of residency, both of which are lawfully required. Liberals argue under the 14^th Amendment that producing such proof puts an undue burden on the voter and that is why you can vote as many times as you want in places like Seattle and San Francisco but only if you are a liberal.  

 

Now, Marriage License & Driver’s License. Both are administered by individual states under authority granted by the 10^th Amendment. The 14^th Amendment requires each state to recognize the laws and privileges that come with them that are granted by the issuing state. Liberals have been conned into believing the 14^th Amendment trumps the 10^th and if the federal government disagrees with any or all portion of state laws regarding driving or marriage or basically anything that falls under the 10^th Amendment, the federal government not only has a right but a duty to nullify the existing law and implement its own in place of. In the case of Driver’s Licensing, not once in modern history has a state been forced to change the laws of their state other than what information is mandatory on each license issued. Why, because over and over, the federal government has recognized that the state has the right to grant this privilege as they see fit. With Marriage Licenses, liberals have decided that there should be a one size fits all federal law that supersedes all exiting state laws that expands the very definition of marriage and forces the state to recognize the new definition despite elections in the majority of states rejecting this new definition.

 

Liberal interpretation of the 14th Amendment and the assault liberals use to redefine the 1st Amendment, I'll save that one or another day.  

The Constitution was written in a manner that at the time, a person with basic knowledge of the English language could understand it. Now its language is merely something for progressives to twist and falsely interpret to push a social agenda including progressive activist judges. When judges put ideology over intent into judgments and rulings, American Liberties is the real loser.    

Panzers, Pansies and Plain Ol'Pigs

Panzers, Pansies and Plain Ol'Pigs
Kevin Bryant

In 1942 we fought against German Panzers lead by General Rommel, the greatest German general and field commander. In 2002 conservative Americans fought against Hollywood Pansies lead by Richard Gere and Barbra Streisand, two of the most outspoken critics of use of military force against our enemies. Today “We The People” fight against Radicalized American (insert your own word here) lead by a Muslin Brotherhood Loving – Barack Obama and a Racist Fake Reverend – Al Sharpton.
 

Obama, Sharpton, Holder, Pelosi, Reid, Durbin, De Blasio, Hillary and the rest of the real America hating criminals. From supporting terrorist with millions of tax dollars to calling police and white conservatives racist, it’s something new almost on a daily basis with these people. The media ignores it and America lets them get away with it. We treat politicians and Fake Reverend Sharpton like Richard Gere and Danny Glover want us to treat fanatical Muslims…… We should all dress in robes, shave our heads, dance around and hand out flowers while playing tambourines while singing Give Peace A Chance or something.
 

Being a real American means standing up for your rights and what you believe in. They don’t like telling them how to live or what to think. Real Americans would rather speak the truth instead of worrying all time about hurting someone’s feelings. Real Americans know security is only as good as you make it, government can’t stop and intruder from breaking into your house before he does. Government can’t protect you from yourself and real Americans know that. Real Americans accept the risks they take and the choices they make.
 

We must show compassion towards those of the Islamic faith. Why? What have they done to earn my compassion? Are they out there in numbers fighting ISIS? Did Muslims here in America show outrage when the planes struck the Twin Towers killing 3000 Americans? Why should I have compassion for someone who thinks it’s Ok to take a 12 year old bride or stone a woman to death if she disobeys her husband?
 

We must respect their religion. I do respect their religion when they actually practice it. If Islam is a religion of peace then why are there more than 1.5 million Muslims around the world killing people who don’t share their beliefs, raping and murdering women after killing their husbands before their very eyes? Does the Quran say go out and kidnap school girls then sell them off as brides? I don’t think you are going to find that in there. Americans have compassion for the victims of Islamic fanatics, why doesn’t those of the Islamic faith have the same compassion for those victims and outrage towards those who commit those atrocious acts of violence.
 

Real Americans clean up their own back yards before complaining about their neighbors and they damn sure don’t kill their neighbor and call it God’s will.

"What's In a Name?

“What’s In a Name?”
By Ron Boat

If we regress to the 1590s, we’re introduced to an inquiry by ‘ol Bill Shakespeare. Act 2, scene 2 of Romeo and Juliet. In the thought of calling things by different names and the meaning thereof, would "a rose by any other name smell as sweet?"

In life, we’re all given names. I'm Ron, I have friends named Bruce and Lou, Marsha and Sue, Tracy and Tim. I know them by their names for the purpose of recognition and communicating. Names used to be… just names.

Names were/are distinctive identifiers telling who we’re talking about and who we know, who we were with or who did this and that. In olden days I would be Ron, son of Robert, and now we manage and make it through our daily lives with more simplicity and less formality. I remember being on a production once and there were 2 Rons running cameras. Yep, the shot assignments from the director got a bit messed up so… we started using our “nicknames.” I was/am RB or just Boat to my friends.

We can go back to England for the term “nickname” which meant: “also or added,” originally being “ekename.” But the term actually came from ancient Greece and Rome when nicknames were used as terms of affection: hupokorisma or meaning “calling by an endearing name.”

But soon, maybe in the early to mid 1900’s, names became less identifiers and more descriptive. An epithet of our lives. Joe Louis was the “Brown Bomber” and the feared “Louisville Lip” was Muhammad Ali. Charlie Parker was “Bird” and Frank was of course “ol Blue eyes.”

Some nicknames were taken from their appearance, some from their actions, capabilities or talents. But they were descriptions, describing the person with – or without – any implied affection.

I’d like to be “Ron the nice guy.” I know “Bruce the artist” and “Al the patriot.” But guys were also known for their personas such as “gentle Ben,” “Tom the jerk” or “Jerry that idiot.” Girls, it seems, have had a problem in that rarely do you hear about “Mary the genius” but more about “Sandy the slut” or “Jenny the whore” or Betty the tease”: Names with a more sexual overtone as well as negative implications.

A longtime friend and business partner saw life and people in forms of reality and truth. He told me in the 70s, “Ron, there are blacks and niggas, whites and honkies. It’s the individual that defines themselves not their race or color.” He himself was a black American and saw the good and bad in people coming from inside, not from their name or position in life, so it became a descriptor that labeled them usually by their own deeds.

There’s enough hated to go around in names like “Whitey” or “Cracker,” “Spic” and “Slant-eye” but when it comes down to it, stick and stones etc. etc. etc. It’s we the people, the individual, that must break out of any societal or self-imposed mold, make our mark, leave our impression and affect for good the status quo of society. It’s on us to be the best we can be whatever our name is.

We’ve certainly made a leap from Al Capone’s “Scarface”  to Cordozar Broadus Jr. as “Snoop Doggy Dogg,” “Snoopzilla,” “Snoop Dogg” and now, “Snoop Lion.” Hummmm.

But now we find that, the “descriptors” assigned to people have taken on a more sinister, darker and more negative characteristic. Ones that can indicate and project implied danger or deceit. The political arena is increasingly replete with people known for their ways, their actions, and their destructive course, and “described” not just named.

When Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama was running for office, it was imperative that the middle name be dropped (to obviously escape unwanted, unintended associations and references?), but now in office it’s fully Barack Hussein Obama and we start to see how negative monikers can be applied, suggested – or earned. His past and present image and activities bring up nicknames such as Bathhouse Barry, Benghazi Barry, O’Dumbo and more.

Alliteration constantly weaves its way into our social and certainly political vocabulary with Michelle becoming ”the Mooch” or “Moochie” based on her extravagant, taxpayer fed spending habits. And “Harry the Hobbler” or the “Obstructer” is finally no longer the gatekeeper and in charge of blocking progress in the Senate, while “Benedict Boehner,” the “Traitor,” is continuing his unpopular stance as Speaker in the House.

A “Portmanteau” (a word you don’t hear much) is expressed in the names and references such as “Hitlery” and serve as a reference as well as associating some to others with less acceptability and more nefariousness in their actions and positions in the past – and possibly to their obscured, intentioned goals and purposes for the future.

So we might take note that names have made the natural – and possibly somewhat logical – progression from identifiers, to descriptors, to warnings. Barry the Destroyer or Obama the Tyrant, and associated names like “Socialist,” “Communist,” or “Progressive” all have their roots in reality and meanings that project an image of unwanted, forewarned impending futures for us as Americans. Add them to a proper name and the person’s documented (or hidden) history and agenda, and you see the implied and portrayed meaning of their personality and public façade.

We hear things in names and yet we’re also a visual people and we want to see things. It’s been said that the French eat with their tongues while Americans eat with their eyes. Meaning we are less influenced by the reality of some situations and experience a more “effected perception” through site and sound.

This is certainly evidenced in the fact that millions did not do their homework, their “reality check,” did not look beyond the “well spoken, clean African-American” candidate but instead took their voting lead from perceived and oblique benefits and goodwill portrayed in words and promises, rhetoric and the slogans like Hope and Change.

And of course the next slogan in the progression of political promotion for the American public in 2012 was a view ahead also known as Barack Obama’s newest campaign catchphrase, “Forward” - which also happens to be a Nazi marching song of the Hitler youth, Vorwärts! Vorwärts!

You can do your own research, find similarities that are not lost on these two world leaders with renowned names, but the effect on the American mindset, the uneasiness and uncertainty, the ultimate change in the American business and social landscape is occurring… and Mein Kampf  is rapidly immerging through our leader’s words, actions, descriptions, names and directives. Democrats should learn that words (and names) have meaning.

Juliet said in the 1590’s: “'Tis but thy name that is my enemy.”

But for us today, America needs to open its collective eyes, see what is real, not hear what’s proclaimed, for the real essence of truth from William of old is: “what matters is what something is, not what it is called” be it a rose or a comrade.

Could a tyrant by any other name transform America as easily? We’re seeing it.

 

Blame the System Not the Individual

Blame the System Not the Individual

Al Ritter 

Yesterday John Boehner was voted in as the next speaker of the House of Representatives. 25 Republicans didn’t vote for the Ohio Congressman, and that was surprising to me that so many would knowingly put their political careers in peril.

If you somehow believe that voting in a Speaker of the House is merely a simple vote and life goes on you are either naïve or you have over simplified the process. To begin with both sides of the aisle vote in this election, and the Speaker of the House doesn’t even need to be an elected official at all! Although these are the rules the probability of that happening are slim to none. 

Because the Speaker of the House makes recommendations for assignments to committees the system is ripe for cronyism. This is nothing new, Nancy Pelosi wielded the same power with the same viciousness aimed to weed out all who weren’t loyal to her. Those she saw as disloyal were relegated to minor roles in committees and sub committees, thereby reducing that individual’s possibility of climbing up through the ranks. 

John Boehner is no different, he knew before the vote was even taken who his loyal friends were and who his Conservative enemies were. He is already formulating his retribution to those he considers “unfriendly.” He also knows that a vote of “present” or missing the vote all together is assign that that person isn’t 100% loyal to him. 

Understand this …….only 3 new Congressional Republicans voted against Boehner Obviously the others were warned ahead of time that if they didn’t vote for Boehner their future careers in the House would be in question.  

Folks this election has NOTHING to do with us it is merely an internal power struggle within the House. Does this dilute the signal we had sent to Washington in the mid-terms? Of course it did! Am I personally upset about this internal election? Damn right I am! 

John Boehner and Mitch McConnell have both blatantly and disrespectfully spit in the eye of every Conservative voter in America, but the question is how can we change this in the future? Obviously if we can’t have an effect on the outcome of an internal House vote then we need to that individual, but even that is no guarantee we as Tea Party voters will be represented in the next Congress. 

However what we CAN do is get more and more Tea Party Conservatives elected to both the House and Senate so their numbers will be sufficient to force the GOP to make moves farther to the right and actually include them in decisions. 

Don’t be mad at individuals who didn’t vote against Boehner because they know how that system works and what it takes to obtain a position of the GOP hierarchy so that they will eventually wield some degree of power.