A Different Perspective on Mitch McConnell.

 

mitch_mcconnellI have tweeted, posted and given speeches on what a bad leader Mitch McConnell is. But what if I am wrong? What if Senator McConnell is, in actuality, a very canny and able leader? “How can that be?” you ask? He couldn’t even get the required votes to repeal even part of Obama Care. Suppose, just suppose, he didn’t want to get those votes but did want to get close? Why and how would he do that?
McConnell is 75 turning 76 in February 2018. He was first elected to the Senate 22 years ago. He has been around politics for a while and knows the ropes as well as anyone. He can play the game with the best of them. Think about the O’Care vote for a minute. Suppose he sat down and thought about it from this perspective. I don’t want to win this vote, but on the other hand, I don’t want anyone to know that I am going back on my word and I definitely want to keep the ear of the President. What can I do to accomplish both? I can see to it that the vote is only one or two short of success while appearing to fight for passage.
Let us look at how he could do that. As the Majority leader of the Senate, he is expected to meet with members of his caucus on a daily basis. He does the easy part first by getting those he can count on to vote in favor of at least a partial repeal to commit to that vote and finding 46 or 47 to do exactly that is not hard. Next, he has to convince the rest of his caucus to vote no. Not quite so easy. What about convincing some of those senators that have voted consistently for repeal under the Obama administration? Slightly tougher, but not impossible. He starts working on a few of those that won’t be facing re-election for at least two more years, like Shelly Moore Capito of West Virginia. Why them? Because of the perceived short memory of the electorate. They can be caught in a blatant lie and her constituents will have forgotten by the time her reelection comes around. Especially if she brings some bacon home to her state in the meantime. It is called job security. It has little to do with concern for her constituents. He could simply have his Whip take a count of the yeas and nays while he does some talking with his caucus and, after an appropriate delay, just refuse to call a vote ‘because we don’t have the votes to pass it’.
Why would he come out in public and say that he would unseat a duly elected senator if Judge Moore had won his election? Because that would cost Moore votes. If it cost him enough votes he would never have to face that public rejection which would more than likely cost him his job and maybe his cash cow that his Senate seat has become. He like so many on the public dole is a multi-millionaire. And as such he is greedy.
I have come to believe that Mitch McConnell is this type leader. Now I want him out even more than before.

Advertisements

A Brief Look at the Similarities Between Islam and Satanism.

There are some basic tenants of Satanism that we can all agree upon. Satan is anti-good. Put another way, Satan is the antithesis of love and peace. Satan is known as the ultimate liar. That entity uses the lie to entice you away from the ultimate good with promises of personal gain and aggrandizement. Satan is the purveyor of selfishness.
The Christian and Jewish faiths along with 99.999% of all religions have some very common facets. They promote love, peace and charity towards all. They look beyond the self.
Before I continue I should bring some historical perspective into play.
Throughout mankind’s history the sexes have been divided into two divisions of labor. Because of the makeup of the world into which they were placed, the size and danger presented by the animals they needed for food, the man had to be the protector and the provider. The woman was endowed with the ability to nurture. That all changed when mankind took control of his environment. No longer was the man forced to go out and face the wild and dangerous beasts to gather food. Mankind tamed those beasts and learned to grow his crop needs in one area. They invented farms and ranches. More and more as this taming of nature progressed there was no need for the woman to find a man to protect her. She could take her place at his side as an equal partner as both provider and nurturer. Man was now free to allow his natural instinct to nurture show through.
These are the roles God intended. He took the first part of the woman from the ribs or side of Adam. Neither the feet to be trod upon nor the head to be dominated, but from the side to be his partner.
Having said all of that, let’s take a look at what we know of Islam.
“The religious message that Muhammad preached grew out of, and responded to, the realities of 7th century Arabia. It was influenced by, and responded to, the political and social conditions, as well as other religious traditions.”1
“While Arabia was critically located along profitable well-traveled trade routes of the Orient, it was far from being tame and safe. It was beset with internal conflict as well as external conflict. So, the world in which Islam emerged was truly a rough neighborhood. War was the natural state of affairs.”1
History teaches us that in 610 AD, at the age of 40, Muhammad, while living in a cave, was visited by a being representing itself as the angel Gabriel. It was this vision that extorted him to “proclaim the name of God.”
Assume for argument’s sake, that this was in reality, the ultimate liar, Satan, sowing the seeds of evil.
This being appeared to Muhammad in successive visions over a course of 20 years. They ended 2 years before his death in Medina in present-day Saudi Arabia in 632 AD. These visions became the basis for the Qur’an. During these years he preached what he was learning from this entity that visited him regularly. One of his main themes was the superiority of men. Women were nothing other than something to be used for sex and as slaves to men’s wishes and desires. If I may quote from an earlier blog of mine to give you some examples from the Qur’an:
“Let’s look at another way women are devalued by Islam.  Sex slavery and rape of the infidel is sanctioned and rewarded under Islam. Muslim clerics all over the world confirm the right to have sex slaves. It is in the Quran — the word of Allah. Politicians and courts of law keep turning a blind eye, law enforcement keeps ignoring it, so this pox on our communities will continue to get worse.”
“Following a victory, Muhammad would usually distribute the captives, both male and female, as slaves to his soldiers. And Muhammad is the “perfect example for Muslims.” According to Islamic law, Muslim men can take “captives of the right hand” (Quran 4:3, 4:24, 33:50). The Quran says: “O Prophet! Lo! We have made lawful unto thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesseth of those whom Allah hath given thee as spoils of war” (33:50). 4:3 and 4:24 extend this privilege to Muslim men in general. The Quran says that a man may have sex with his wives and with these slave girls: “The believers must (eventually) win through, those who humble themselves in their prayers; who avoid vain talk; who are active in deeds of charity; who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess, for (in their case) they are free from blame.” (Quran 23:1-6)”
“Prosperous are the believers who in their prayers are humble and from idle talk turn away and at almsgiving are active and guard their private parts save from their wives and what their right hands own then being not blameworthy.” (Quran 23:1-6)”
“Those whom their “right hands own” (Quran 4:3, 4:24, 33:50) are slaves, and inextricable from the concept of Islamic slavery as a whole is the concept of sex slavery, which is rooted in Islam’s devaluation of the lives of non-Muslims. The Quran stipulates that a man may take four wives as well as hold slave girls as sex slaves. These women are captured in wartime and are considered the spoils of war. Islam avoids the appearance of impropriety, declaring that the taking of these sex slaves does not constitute adultery if the women are already married, for their marriages are ended at the moment of their capture. A manual of Islamic law directs: “When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman”s previous marriage is immediately annulled” (Reliance of the Traveller, 9.13). “
Obviously there is much more to say on this topic; however, I made you all a promise to keep my blogs at around 1000 words so I will continue this next time.

1: Quoted from The Major Religions of the World by Robert Fawcett

Is Islam a Religion?

We should start with some kind of definition of Religion. How do you define that word? Merriam Webster defines it thus:
Definition of religion
1 a :the state of a religious
a nun in her 20th year of religion
b (1) :the service and worship of God or the supernatural
(2) :commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 :a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic :scrupulous conformity :conscientiousness
4 :a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

That is pretty broad. Using that definition we could call many things a ‘religion’. Let’s see if we can find a more practical one. To do that we will look at the majority of what we call religions in the world today. Do they have a common theme or thesis? It turns out they do. Whether you are speaking of Buddhism, Judaism, Hinduism, Shintoism or Christianity, to name only a few in today’s world, we find that they all have a few common threads. Among them are: Love of their fellow humans and even lower forms, tolerance, forgiveness. And kindness. None of those mentioned espouse killing nor intentional cruelty. With the possible exception of Buddhism, all of the holy works of these religions were written by observers. The Bible, for instance, was not written by God, though it is thought to be inspired by that being. There is no book in the Bible that was directly written by Jesus. They were written about Him, or the works of the Christian God.
Buddha did write, but he wrote about his philosophy of life and how he thought it should be lived. He never claimed to be inspired by any supernatural, omnipotent or omniscient being. Many of those philosophies can be found, in one form or another, in most religions yet today. His thoughts have been expounded upon by many leaders of the faith. I suspect he would be shocked to find that he has become deified.
Now it is time to turn to Islam. The holy book of Islam was written by one man. Muhammad or Mohammad, depending on where you look. Muhammad is the only recognized “Messenger of Allah”, their name for God. His ‘Holy’ writings can be found in a book called the Quran. This is a book of 114 chapters and it covers the gamut of the beliefs of that one man. I have the English translation of that book and will quote extensively from it later in this missive… A translation by one of their own, a respected Imam or religious leader. Perhaps priest would be closest to a Christian’s understanding of the word. I did a search for the word love in that work. I found it referenced in only one context, with reference to Allah. There are many mentions of ‘good’, but even that is skewed from our understanding of that word. A good wife, for instance, is one who is totally subservient to her husband. She must obey him in all things. The Quran specifically deals with the disobedient wife. She is to be punished up to and including beating. That is ‘good’ in the Quran. Most religions forbid lying. The Christian and Jewish holy books even incorporate that into their primary tenets. For both the ninth commandment is “Thou shall not bear witness against your neighbor.”
The Quran says that it is quite alright to lie to any infidel. (that’s you and I) That comes into play when they are trying to convert you to their religion. For instance, they are not allowed to have any friends that are not confirmed Muslims, BUT, they can pretend to befriend you in order to convert you. By the way if you refuse to convert they are instructed to use any means and if those means do not work they are to kill you rather than leave an apostate alive.
Killing is allowed in many instances particularly in the case of women. A husband may kill his wife for the heinous crime of going outside without their burka, being alone with a man not of their household, disobedience in many forms or even a perceived ‘dishonoring’ of the family. I see more and more of this everyday in the news and here in the U.S. it is becoming a common practice. This religion does not respect the women among us. They are not to be considered in any manner as equal to other than another chattel. A woman not in a burka may be used in anyway a man chooses including, but not limited to rape or gang rape even killing if they feel the offense is great enough such as wearing a blouse that actually shows some cleavage. Those are ‘asking’ to be raped. Again, see the headlines. Oh yeah, I can be killed for writing this. You are not allowed to speak against the Prophet. Shucks, you can’t even attempt to draw a picture of that religious stalwart. If you doubt that, remember Pamela Geller and her attempt to hold a contest for the best picture of Muhammad. Two Muslims were killed while attempting to shoot up the venue with high powered rifles. She has lately been the subject of attempts to behead her for speaking out about the Islamic ‘religion’.
Let’s look at another way women are devalued by Islam.  Sex slavery and rape of the infidel is sanctioned and rewarded under Islam. Muslim clerics all over the world confirm the right to have sex slaves. It is in the Quran — the word of Allah. Politicians and courts of law keep turning a blind eye, law enforcement keeps ignoring it, so this pox on our communities will continue to get worse.
Following a victory, Muhammad would usually distribute the captives, both male and female, as slaves to his soldiers. And Muhammad is the “perfect example for Muslims.” According to Islamic law, Muslim men can take “captives of the right hand” (Quran 4:3, 4:24, 33:50). The Quran says: “O Prophet! Lo! We have made lawful unto thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesseth of those whom Allah hath given thee as spoils of war” (33:50). 4:3 and 4:24 extend this privilege to Muslim men in general. The Quran says that a man may have sex with his wives and with these slave girls: “The believers must (eventually) win through, those who humble themselves in their prayers; who avoid vain talk; who are active in deeds of charity; who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess, for (in their case) they are free from blame.” (Quran 23:1-6)
Prosperous are the believers who in their prayers are humble and from idle talk turn away and at almsgiving are active and guard their private parts save from their wives and what their right hands own then being not blameworthy.” (Quran 23:1-6)
Those whom their “right hands own” (Quran 4:3, 4:24, 33:50) are slaves, and inextricable from the concept of Islamic slavery as a whole is the concept of sex slavery, which is rooted in Islam’s devaluation of the lives of non-Muslims. The Quran stipulates that a man may take four wives as well as hold slave girls as sex slaves. These women are captured in wartime and are considered the spoils of war. Islam avoids the appearance of impropriety, declaring that the taking of these sex slaves does not constitute adultery if the women are already married, for their marriages are ended at the moment of their capture. A manual of Islamic law directs: “When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman”s previous marriage is immediately annulled” (Reliance of the Traveller, o9.13).
The whole point of this diatribe is this: Should Islam be considered a religion in this or any country, or is it simply a philosophy with religious overtones? Does it really have any right to our Constitution’s freedom of religion clause? Rather obviously, I would say no.

A Dream Job

How would you like to have this job?

The particulars are these: Full time pay, but part time work and you are not even required to show up for much of that part time bit; you get to set your own pay; you cannot be fired until your contract runs out and even then, since you held the job, that contract has an excellent chance of being renewed indefinitely; you can lie about your qualifications and what you would accomplish during your tenure and nobody will hold you accountable for your lies; you will be able to foist the the most onerous parts of your job onto others; you will have a virtually unlimited expense account; your insurance will be the best, even better than most of the people you work for could obtain.
Sound good to you? You can have that job simply by getting elected to congress. Let’s take a look at those points.

Once elected you will have the privilege of having at approximately one half of each year as paid time off so you can campaign for re-election. You can even attend a few fund raisers to help out. If you listen to older and more experienced capital hill denizens, you can even figure out how to pocket some of that. Even during the time the congress is in session you will not be required to actually be on Capital Hill. Go to lunch, play golf or whatever rather than deal with the humdrum parts of the job like listening to what other are saying about the issues before your particular body instead of them listening to your much more cogent utterances.

Think you are not being paid enough for the job? Just vote for another pay raise for yourself. Get caught in a lie or other minor faux pas? Don’t worry, you cannot be fired unless you are proven guilty of actually committing a crime.

One of the big perks is not having to actually having to do the job your friends elected you to do. Want to avoid a controversy? Just fob of the onerous stuff on the regulatory agencies. Sure they violate the constitution, but that is just a few words on an old piece of paper that few pay any attention to anymore. So technically it makes you a law breaker, a criminal, but no one is going to say a word. If you ever do get round to passing a law that you would not like to follow, no problem. You just make it a law you are exempt from. It is done all of the time.

Get caught speeding or DUI or even assaulting another citizen while congress is in session? Again, no problem. You cannot be charged or arrested for such minor trivialities while the congress is in session and you are in D.C.

Would you like to see gay Paris or visit Rio during Carnival? Take an all expense paid “junket”. Your friends an neighbors will pay for it out of the taxes you forced on them. You may have to spend a few hours of your all expense paid vacation in meetings, but then there has to be some reason for that trip.
I guess we should let you in on the pay for this part time job. As of 2015, the base salary for all rank-and-file members of the U.S. House and Senate is $174,000 per year, plus benefits.  Now if you are lucky enough to voted in as a leader you salary goes up.

SENATE LEADERSHIP – Majority Party Leader – $193,400, Minority Party Leader – $193,400

HOUSE LEADERSHIP – Speaker of the House – $223,500, Majority Leader – $193,400, Minority Leader – $193,400

There are some popular, but false myths about congressional remuneration:
1.) They do indeed pay into social security.
2.) They must serve a minimum of three years to be eligible for their pensions and then it goes on a sliding scale determined by the number of years served. It is not an automatic 100% of their salaries at retirement.
3.) They don’t begin collecting until age 62 or 65.
4.) They do not necessarily vote for a pay increase every year. They haven’t done that since 2008. They do receive a “cost of living” increase on January 1 of each year. Some members do refuse this. Not many, but some.

Care to learn more about this? Try this link: Congressional Salaries

Governor Justice’s War on Seniors

The Justice budget proposal looks like an all out assault on the one group the democrats in this state and many others, would like to have just go away. In one way this makes sense. (Stay with me now. No jumping to conclusions.) Of course the title lets you in on part of where I am headed with this. The senior citizen. Just for kicks (and because it fits the parameters) lets include all of the poorest among us. The reason I said it makes sense for the progressive to want us gone, or at the very least, silent, is because they point out the ultimate failure of the progressive tax and spend philosophy. It obviously doesn’t work because these two groups are growing at an exponential rate all over our nation.
The old among us is growing because our life spans are growing. Or were until the government took over the health care industry. What used to be the best health care in the world is now rated barely above a third world country. But that is another blog.
The poor group is, arguably, growing as a direct result of progressive policies. The loss of jobs can be traced to government regulation in many, many instances.
OK, I am not here to discuss the federal government but the state government so lets get to it.
How is Jim Justice declaring war on these people?
You just have to look at his budget bill. He demands that we raise taxes in the very areas that the seniors and the poor cannot afford to have any increase. To wit: Double the gasoline tax; increase (double again) DMV fees; Tax food; increase the sales tax. There are others but I don’t need to make this too long a read so I will just discuss the impact of these four. What I call the Egregious Four.
The West Virginia tax on Gasoline puts us in the top 20 in the nation. Jim Justice would put us in the top five. Our DMV rates are reasonable at this point. Jim Justice would have them join states like California and make them just plain unafordable for many of the poor among us. These are the people that don’t use their autos for vacation travel. They can’t afford vacations. They use their cars to get to the hospital – to buy food for their families and themselves – to get to Dr. appointments then to the pharmacy to pick up prescriptions.
Tax food. TAX FOOD? Many among us fought a long hard battle to get rid of that discriminatory tax for years. Now justice wants it back. This one is really bad for everybody, not just the poor and aged among us.
Ah yes. The sales tax. Justice states in his budget proposal that this wil eventually eliminate the state income tax. Put on your thinking caps and use your internet research skills and find me an example where the government said they were going tro repeal a tax at a later date or that a tax was going to be temporary and kept their word. I could not find one. I have to agree that a one percent increase here wouldn’t bother those that have incomes above the poverty level all that much. They won’t like it, but they can pay it with ease. Let’s look at those on fixed incomes. The first glaring point here is that there are actually many of the older among us that pay no income tax. Their income is insufficient to break into that category. Another indication of just how poor they are. This tax would affect their budgets most severely. Many cannot afford to live on their incomes as it is. They have to depend on the local food bank, where it is available, and other charities just to eat. Others cannot afford proper shoes and clothing or other necessities because of the cost and now Justice wants to increase that cost. Yes, I know many of these personally.
There is a plan that has been worked out by Delegate McGeehan and others that would keep our taxes static and even allow for some savings. Why the legislature and the governor is ignoring this is beyond my power to reason.

An Open Letter to Donald Trump

lady-justice

 

A Question of Justice

Mr. President Elect;
I thank you for being so open with the inner workings of your transition efforts. This is something we have not seen since Ronald Reagan was in your position and it is very refreshing. I sincerely hope your entire administration; will show this kind of openness and transparency.

I do have one rather serious bone to pick with your recent actions. Your statement so soon after the election that you “… do not want to hurt the Clintons” was very magnanimous and even, in some respects, ‘presidential’; however it sent me a startling message. You have said, loud and clear, that there are some people that are simply above any law in this and probably other countries. Regardless of the egregious nature of the crimes committed against the security of this nation and the extreme violation of trust evinced by the FBI investigation already conducted and implied by those ongoing nor the reasonable assumption that she put our national security at risk to say nothing of the violation of her oath, even the serious implication that she, Hillary R. Clinton, might be complicit in several murders, you will not “hurt” the Clintons.

My question to you is: just how high in the government hierarchy do you have to be to be safe from any and all prosecution? Since we have seen the public trials of Senators, Congressmen and even 4 star generals prosecuted, it must be cabinet level and above.

To be honest, Mr. President Elect, I hoped for better from you.

trump-1

Campaign to Kill Good

The Campaign to Kill Good

We have become a nation ruled by an oligarchy. Oligarchy is defined as “a political system governed by a few people”. Usually the rich. Now an oligarchy does not care very much for the common people. They do pay lip service to them. They continue to promise that group that they are the ones that will improve their lot. Any one opposing them is demeaned and slandered into oblivion, while they just keep promising the masses that they will improve their life if only they will wait just a little while longer while they, the elite rulers, solve just a couple more problems. The oligarchy makes use of the “big lie”.
The big lie was brought forcefully to the forefront of national politics by Hitler. He knew that any lie repeated often enough is taken for absolute truth and he gained total control of the government with this tactic.
Today we have a movement that is called liberal, but the proper term is progressive. These are two different views of how a government, our government, should work. The liberal works in small steps to advance their agenda. First they take over the education system starting with the colleges and universities. If they can control what the future teachers are taught they will control what the children are taught by those future teachers. Then they co-opt the mass media using these liberal educated student journalists so they are able to spread the word in any way they want. They can use the “big lie” much more effectively.
Enter Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Barack Obama and today’s pretender to the throne, Hillary Clinton. Each were or are convinced they can rule because they have convinced the greater mass of people that individual liberty is a fallacy. They shout that this should never have been a republic, but rather a democracy. In a democracy the voice of the people are heard and that voice is personified in the person that collects the votes required to sit in the Oval office. That one person has a ‘mandate’, evidenced by the mere fact that he or she won the election, to speak for all the people. They have their pen and phone. Any separation of powers is nothing more than a hindrance to their governing.
Enter on to our stage one Hillary Clinton. A proven liar, who actually said that it was her “turn” to rule America. She of the “big lie”.
We cannot forget the other facet of today’s American political scene, the republican party. Supposedly the ‘loyal opposition’. They would much rather have a Clinton presidency that will continue to grant politicians surcease for their greed and power hungry appetites than support the person that won their party’s nomination. They have not so much as run one TV ad for ‘their’ nominee. Their fear of losing their gravy train and the power they wield in government is tantamount to treason. No, it does not meet the legal definition of that heinous crime, but it does meet the social definition. They apparently are so concerned about protecting their position that they would rather see this country go completely social democrat than defend the constitution and the republic.
This country led the world in military might, economic stability and social justice for over one hundred fifty years. Today we are a third world power militarily, the world banks are leaving the dollar behind as the benchmark and moving to the Chinese Yuan or Renminbi and social justice has been replaced with the devaluation of the Judeo-Christian ethic to the point that a person can now be sued into financial ruin for adhering to their Christian beliefs. Freedom OF religion has been replaced by the credo of freedom FROM religion.
This is the destruction of good in the name of greed and power.
It seems that we no longer have a two party system in this country. We have on party called Democrat that is focused on the destruction of the Constitution because it is “outdated” and no longer applies to modern society, though they have never satisfactorily explained how that is so, and another party called Republican that are anything but. They are perhaps even more greedy than their cohorts in the other side of the aisle.
There has to be a political party that honestly desires to return this country to the land of the free. Libertarians? Nope. They do indeed want a smaller government, but the government they want is isolationist in this world of global economy and ISIS. The government they want is so small as to be next door neighbors to anarchy. Greens? Nah. Too narrow in focus and they want many of the same things the liberals want just for different reasons. There are many neophytes out there struggling to find the alternative to the present major parties. I have looked at many and spoken to most of the leaders. None seem to measure up to the founders ideals. I still believe in those ideals.
The only one that comes close, in my humble opinion, is the Constitution Party. I will have more to say on them another time
That leaves the main question. How do we stop the destruction of good?

Paul Ryan is NOT a RINO. I am.

You read that title correctly. Paul Ryan is NOT a RINO. Neither is McConnell. Nope, Sessions isn’t either. But it would appear that I am.
How can I say things like that with a straight face and be deadly serious? Just consider the facts.
Most of the republican members of congress were considered RINOs. The Republican party officially supports them. They have become the republican party. For some reason they decided to leave me behind, to completely ignore me and my kind.
We have become pariahs.
In today’s world, the right wing, patriotic, constitution loving American is being left out of the political process and without a voice. We have become the true Republicans In Name Only.
Since I do not enjoy not having a voice in the affairs of my country, I decided to do something about that. But what can a person do. I can not take on the sins of the Democrats and most other parties out there don’t seem to have much of a voice. Only thing to do is more research.
Let’s see. There is the Green party. Definitely not for me. Appears to be an off shoot of the democrats and their goals are really unreasonable. How about the Libertarians. Again, not to my liking. They are the next thing to anarchy. And, particularly here in West Virginia, they used subterfuge, and out right dishonesty to obtain their goals. Their ‘guiding light’, one Chris Anders, uses an auto dialer to spread his message (Hate those things with a passion) and frequently spreads misinformation, if not outright untruths. Case in point: He told anyone that would listen the the Jefferson County Commissioners voted themselves a pay raise. They didn’t, That came out of the state capital. There is one other point about Mr. Anders that disturbs me. He lives in Virginia! He does not live in WEST Virginia yet he is spearheading a move to take control of the Jefferson county republican party.
Then there is the fact that they are avowed isolationists wanting no involvement in world affairs. I have a friend that tells me that I am just too forthright. OK, the term he means is blunt. I guess I am at times, but I am not a politician. There are times when being blunt is necessary.
Oh well. Keep looking.
How about the Constitution party? Good name, but do they mean it. Have they got a chance of ever winning anything? Probably not this election cycle, but they are the third largest political party in this country. Do they mean it? I read their platform. They seem to be dedicated to returning this country to the constitutional republic the democrats have spent the last 50 years doing everything in their power to destroy. They make no bones about their belief that this country should be run by the president. Period. Separation of powers is to them a fallacy. And old idea that we should just ignore.
Not my cup of tea. I actually like the constitution.
Hmm bit of a rant there, but every word the truth. Back to the Constitution party.
They are on the ballot in 25 states this cycle, which is a huge improvement or the last one. They have achieved major party status in Wyoming . Their donations have more than doubled in the last few months and just keep growing. There is a large contingent of Cruz supporters that have joined and other disillusioned republicans are joining up every day. I can easily envision them being a major force in the next election cycle. Why? Because they listen. Because they are sincere in wanting to return us. Because this country is looking for some honesty in Politics! It is my belief that this party offers just that and wouldn’t that confuse the politicians of today! Because conservatives all over this country are fed up with a republican party that refuses to adhere to their conservative roots and instead just want the power and money that currently goes with an elected office in D.C.
Personally, I am fed up with being a RINO. I do believe that explains why I am now a registered member of the Constitution party of the United States.

In Response to a Question

I am frequently asked one question that needs a response. In an effort to head off having to write the same thing so many times I thought I would answer it here.
The question? How the **** can I help?
The first thing is to consider how to make use of the obvious anger you have. How? Restrain it. Don’t let it color your discussions with any liberal. Think about this for a minute and imagine this all too common scene: You are talking with a person that does not agree with your views. One thing is apparent. You want to convince that person you are right just as he/she wants to convince you of the sanctity of their position. So you begin to raise your voice in an attempt to get them to listen to you. You just want them to shut up and LISTEN. The trouble is he /she is thinking the same thing so now we have a shouting match where nobody is listening to anybody.
Try listening to their side. They just might reveal the central flaw in their position which you can use to counter their arguments in a sane manner. Get rid of all of the invectives. The name calling the swear words, the insults. These will quickly turn off their hearing and you will accomplish nothing other than make yourself feel less frustrated.
The constitution is not one they will not hear. That they believe is just and old outdated piece of paper that should be scrapped. Law of the land? Not a problem. They simply change it as they see fit.
Socialism can be shown to be a failure in every single case. The U.S.S.R.? Doesn’t exist anymore. Argentina? Where a hamburger cost $28.00 and no one has even $5.00? Were food riots are a daily occurrence? What about England, they say? I have been to England and yes they do have some socialism. Their medical profession for example. Anyone that can afford it leaves the country to be treated for anything worse than a broken bone or a cold. There aren’t enough doctors or nurses to handle the traffic because it has become a second rate profession. When I was over there several years ago, I suffered a bad cut and needed stitches. The wound was bleeding profusely. I waited nine hours to be seen. I was using a handkerchief to stop the flow of blood. It was soon soaked through, but I had nothing else and could not get any help. By the time I was seen the cut was infected, still seeping blood and hurt worse than it had when I came in. I was given a few stitches and some antibiotics. Total time in the room? About ten minutes. At least the anesthetic used to put in the stitches stopped the pain for a while. Yeah, socialism is great. Oh yeah. The taxes. They pay, on average, $85.00 out of every $100.00 they earn to support it and are still going broke. What does that mean in practical terms? It means you work 310.25 days each year to pay other peoples bills and just 54 and ¼ days for yourself.
OK I got off track there for a while, but if they do bring up social programs there are plenty of facts to use in rebuttal. The real point is – use your anger to your advantage and yelling, swearing or not voting against these disastrous liberal policies is not the way to “help”. Learn to bank the fires of your anger and learn to listen. Then unleash that anger in a way that will actually do some good. Not doing anything only makes them stronger. Not voting only makes them stronger.
We use the term RINO to highlight a person that is a republican in name only. Sorry that is not true anymore. The RINO is the republican of these days. The conservative has been left out in the cold.
Today I registered as a member of the Constitution Party. To paraphrase Reagan, I did not leave the republican party. They left me. I can still vote for those of any party that I think have a chance of helping to save this country while having the ability to work towards something better. A Constitutional Republic just like we used to have. That will take a while and I may not live to see it (I am an old guy), but I will go to my grave knowing that I fought the good fight and made a difference. A small one to be sure, but a difference and in a good way.

Conservative Dilemma

The Conservative Dilemma

Many years ago I was faced with a very real dilemma. This dilemma involved my personal and very closely held principles on the one hand and my moral obligations on the other. It was the first time I had ever faced such a situation. Normally these two were one and the same. Not this time.
You see I was at that age when young men face the call to go into the military. My personal principles said, and very strongly, that I should keep myself as safe as possible. I should not deliberately place myself in harms way. I was meant to live and live a happy healthy life with all of my faculties and limbs. Joining the military would put all of that at serious risk.
Countering that was the moral obligation to serve the nation that fostered that safety and the freedoms that country gave me just because I was lucky enough to be born in America. At that time I was only peripherally aware of the struggle that brought about that nation. I had been taught a very real history of this nation. I had learned of the founding fathers who had pledged their lives, fortunes and their “Sacred Honor” to bring it about. I knew that most had lost the first two while keeping their “Sacred Honor”. But all of that was learned from books so I could pass the tests they gave me to write. It wasn’t all that real to me. Oh, I was raised in a family that held all of it dear. They were, what is now viewed as the old fashioned republicans. The fought the liberalization of their country. The were vocal in their angst regarding the liberal movement away from the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. But again it was a nebulousity. Something of only philosophical importance to my young and know it all mind. Suddenly I was being forced to make all of it real. I did not realize it at the time, but I was making a decision about how I was going to live my life. Was I to be just another person that accepted what others were willing to give me or would I be a person that defended others and fought to keep the American dream alive. Not that I ever thought about it like that at the time.
Well I made that decision after some time. I swore the oath and wore the uniform. For the first time I put others ahead of myself. My moral obligation had won out over my personal principles and as a result, that obligation became my highest held personal principle. The two were now one. Now, here I am, almost half a century later faced with a similar choice, but one that is just as important.
I fought the good fight. I vehemently opposed the Trump nomination run. I desperately wanted a constitutional conservative to make that run and God willing, win the white house. Trump was a very poor choice for that. Now I am faced with the dilemma of either lending my vote to this man I don’t really trust of of ceding the presidency to a woman I KNOW hates all that the constitution stands for. She is both a liar and a criminal and quite possibly a traitor in the very legal sense of that word. There are other choices on the ballot. The Libertarians have a good man the Constitution Party has a man that holds many of my beliefs. I can happily live with either in the oval office. The simple fact is that neither stands even the slightest chance of winning. The libertarians have never gotten beyond the one per cent vote level and the Constitution Party in a complete unknown to the voters. The only thing they can do is take votes away from the Republican and give the election to the Constitution and freedom destroying Liberals.
It comes down to this: I don’t like Trump. He is not a conservative, but he does espouse SOME conservative principles and he does appear genuine in hi desire to keep America from becoming an Islamic state. He does appear to be a man that will do his best to enforce the laws of our country, for the most part. Hillary, on the other hand scares the living Hell out of me. For so many reasons.
Again, the dilemma. Principles or moral obligation​? Again, I am forced to choose my moral obligation to keep the traitor out of the White House. I will vote for Trump and put my principles aside for the good of the country.