So… Here’s my very serious – GIF free – post (co-written by the other – ever brilliant, but not so frequent – Collision writer).
I have been asked why I’ve focused so much on Ted Cruz instead of Donald Trump as of late, here’s why:
I think most of us would like to believe that those who follow after Trump are merely misguided, but for many he appeals to the darker proclivities living within us, the part of us that craves control and power.
I’ve found that the vast majority of the men I’ve met who support Trump are authoritarians or, as one Twitter user noted, the embodiment of Dale Gribble (you can laugh, I did). Of course they don’t openly admit this, and many are in a state of delusion in regards to their own condition – yet they indeed mirror the characteristics of an authoritarian. They find themselves to be higher on the food chain, and feel rightfully placed in a position of power over those who are weaker. They don’t see the value in those beneath them, and have a black and white world view. While masked in self-righteous ego driven behavior, they project their own feelings of inadequacy and rage onto one individual or, in this particular case, a scapegoat group of individuals.
Back in 2011, on The Duke Machado Show, Ted Cruz was interviewed on his immigration stance. The video, filmed in Waco, TX, following a Tea Party Senate forum, was not fully released until yesterday, February 4th. A portion of the video was released when the discussion on Birthright Citizenship was being bounced around, see below:
His stance has clearly changed, considering his current immigration plan, located here:
End birthright citizenship. It makes no sense for us to be providing the tremendous incentive of automatic citizenship to the children of those who enter illegally. Most nations on earth do not do so, and neither should we. Birthright citizenship was meant to ensure that the children of slaves were guaranteed citizenship. It was not meant to confer citizenship on the children of people who are here illegally; nor was it intended to confer citizenship on the children of birth tourists, a burgeoning industry that makes a mockery of American citizenship. As President, I will take immediate steps to pass legislation or a constitutional amendment to end birthright citizenship.
The full video, which lasts for roughly 21 minutes, has now been released by Duke, along with Patriot Insight. Five months ago, in the comments section of the above video, Duke – being a conservative – gave an answer as to why he withheld the rest of the footage:
Four candidates are in the lead: Hillary and Bernie on the left, Donald and Ted on the right. That pretty much says all you need to know about politics in America at this point in time; The bill of goods, the con artist, the perpetual martyr, and Donald… Calm and sensible is no longer the route we are on, you must whisper sweet nothings of free stuff, lie, or be as outrageous and egotistical as you possibly can. Or in Hillary’s case, all of that, plus have female genitalia.
I’m convinced that this is no longer about left and right, this is Big Government vs. Small Government, Reality TV vs. Facts, Authoritarianism vs. Democratic Principles, Pizzazz vs. Sanity, and they’re winning because maybe – just maybe – we’ve crossed the isthmus.
Mafia mentality, reality TV politics, and authoritarianism are what’s in right now. Like a horrible, horrible fashion choice. Like skinny jeans and man buns, side ponytails and tight rolled pants.
Real Feminism, Conservatism, and Liberalism are so last century.
First and foremost, before I even begin this blog post, I am going to address the fact that I don’t know what happened to Freddie Gray. I’m not privy to information that would give me the definitive answers I would need to make an accurate judgment call. Freddie Gray died in police custody after his spine was severed, and while it sounds questionable, I’m not interested in making assumptions. That said, I have opinions on the debacle that stand regardless of the outcome.
I saw a multitude of Martin Luther King Jr. quotes, but for now I’ll note two in particular:
“A riot is the language of the unheard.”
“Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into friend.”
The former was by a Baltimore protester; apparently this was some form of approval for her and others to burn, loot, and destroy that which isn’t theirs. The latter was posted by someone who had used their previous 10 tweets to promote the #BlueLivesMatter hashtag, and share other nifty quotes similar to, “Don’t like cops? Next time call a crackhead.” Both individuals backed their personal opinions with the words of Martin Luther King sitting in their proverbial holster. The former seems to forget that the quote contains more than just their choice words, specifically, “I’m absolutely convinced that a riot merely intensifies the fears of the white community while relieving the guilt.” The latter clearly skipped that all important day in school when he was supposed to learn that MLK believed that civil disobedience was a responsibility in the face of unjust laws and actions. MLK Jr. wrote some of his greatest words behind jail bars after being hauled away by police officers, and spoke some of his greatest words in an act to diffuse violent uprisings. Ms. Former and Sir. Latter have cherry picked the words of MLK without understanding his message, and as an avid fan of MLK, well; it makes me a wee bit irate.
In both instances I felt shame. I went on to find a multitude of people on Twitter, from both sides, sharing Martin Luther King quotes… The quotes were mere snippets taken out of context by the ignorant, used for their own political gain. In reality, MLK would be shaking his finger at both sides. So, here are the words of Martin Luther King Jr. that desperately need to be heard today (I chose this large quote because it contains many of the lines I saw used today):
“Now I wanted to say something about the fact that we have lived over these last two or three summers with agony and we have seen our cities going up in flames. And I would be the first to say that I am still committed to militant, powerful, massive, non-violence as the most potent weapon in grappling with the problem from a direct action point of view. I’m absolutely convinced that a riot merely intensifies the fears of the white community while relieving the guilt. And I feel that we must always work with an effective, powerful weapon and method that brings about tangible results. But it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the negro poor has worsened over the last twelve or fifteen years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity.”
It’s time that we embrace his words, all of them. There is a problem, but rioting is not the answer, nor is silence. This is not a race issue. The majority of the police in Baltimore are black, they aren’t targeting blacks, it just happens to be the case that the majority of crime in Baltimore is perpetrated by blacks. I’m not in the same camp of people who would say that racism is dead. Racism exists, on both sides. If you don’t believe me, take a stroll through East St. Louis with a group of diverse ethnicities. The diversity in the Baltimore PD is exactly what everyone was desperate for in Ferguson, yet Baltimore PD has a history that I suspect few would label as expected. Regardless, the rioters/protesters in Baltimore and Ferguson have no right to compare themselves to the civil rights movement.
When Martin Luther King spoke the words above to those fighting for civil rights, and when Malcolm X spoke his, the individuals their words were geared towards were people facing segregation and prejudice. Law abiding citizens were suffering at the hands of another race simply because of their color. A church was burned to the ground in Alabama, with four innocent girls of color trapped inside; burned alive because of their skin pigmentation. Black men were being brutalized simply for speaking to a white woman, and women of color were being treated as dogs by their employers. They weren’t dealing drugs on the street corner, they weren’t burglarizing homes and assaulting the innocent, the audience they were speaking to were law abiding citizens who were facing persecution for the way God had designed them. The color of your skin determined if you could vote, what restroom you used, and what school you attended. It was inhuman and unfair. Their plight was so astronomically different from those in Ferguson and Baltimore. In fact, King was arrested multiple times for leading non-violent protests. His quote, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” is among my favorite. He believed that civil disobedience is a moral responsibility in the face of unjust laws. One might shake their head at that ideal when they face a law that doesn’t tug on their moral heart strings, i.e., the due process that victims of police brutality have a right to, but then they’ll read the stories of German families who hid Jews in their walls with feelings of admiration. King’s reasoning is and was sound in the face of such disgraceful laws, and he didn’t choose, as many do today, who was worthy of rights based off of which victim he personally liked more.
King found the platform for his stance within The Constitution, and without such platform would have had very little leverage since other countries followed our lead in the civil rights movement. He didn’t take the approach of “This is what other countries are doing,” but instead knew that the United States was unique in that our founding documents gave him the ammunition he needed. King wasn’t fighting to equalize us with other countries; he was fighting to make America the first of its kind. We have been a country that others emulate. In 1963 a young black protester in Britain was moved by the actions of Rosa Parks and staged his own bus boycott, awaking his country to move towards their own equality laws. In 1972 a strict law was put in place that denied immigration to those without a strong heritage in Britain, which wildly limited any increase in a diverse population, hence why in the UK the African American population is 1,148,738 vs. roughly 42,240,000 in the U.S. All over this world we find prejudice against race, religion, and opinion, but America is unique in that we are the first to overcome and support the rights of all people. We all have the same rights in America; the problem is that they are being abused by authority more frequently. That doesn’t negate issues that we need to work on, but it does put things in perspective. So many posts have been talking about the failures that we had in the past, and that we have today, yet they dismiss the fact that every other country has that same horrid history; we are the outlier; we are the country that has done the most about our issues, and it’s because our Constitution demands it.
The very people in the streets of Baltimore screaming for their equality continually vote for politicians that King would be ashamed of, politicians that raise black unemployment, give more power to the government, and fuel race relations. Baltimore has been under Democrat policies for 50+ years. They’re, in essence, paying for their own prison. They do not utter his same cries, nor even relate to the struggles and aspirations of that time period. I’m not one to list the wrongs of those killed in police custody, because as I’ve said before, they deserve due process and I find it ignorant when people justify a wrongful death with a criminal record that involves crimes that do not carry a death penalty… However, the criminal record of King included peaceful protests and civil disobedience, the criminal record of Freddie Gray is made up of 18 arrests; including burglary, drug charges, second-degree assault, etc… Would King have fought for his right to due process? Absolutely. Would he compare their criminal records and act as though their struggle is the same? Not likely. Is that to say that Gray deserved to die? Absolutely not. That is to point out that the struggle of today is not the same as the struggles of the civil rights movement, and the comparisons are DOA to those that know the difference. There is a difference in demanding the right to vote, and demanding the right to confiscate tampons from a burning CVS without police intervention.
To give an example of such outlandish comparisons, I’ll tap into the current feminist movement. I was watching Mad Men the other day, and I found myself getting angry at how the women were treated. Sexual Harassment was rampant, women had little say, and their objectification can only be described as horrific. Don has numerous affairs while Betty gets to be chastised by her philandering husband when his boss is too flirty with her. During that time, women without husbands were to be pitied outcasts, and women with abusive and cheating husbands were expected to smile and cope, and don’t even get me started on the shame that followed you if you divorced your husband. With actual ads stating things like, “It’s true! The harder a wife works, the better she looks!” and “Even a lady can learn….” etc. But I can look around our world today and see that those ideals have changed, that we are treated as equals. The false “pay gap” narrative is perpetuated by those who emulate the vaguely disguised beliefs of the old sexist ads and assume that a lady doesn’t have the ability to think beyond her own body parts, much less research the farce data they used to fool her. If I go running around naked in the streets and complain that men were objectifying me and doubting my sensibilities like they did innocent fully clothed secretaries in the 60s, people would tilt their head and advise me of treatment facilities available in my area, and rightfully so.
However, there is indeed a struggle, a struggle that has been silenced by the acts of obnoxious protesters and looters. They expect those who possess the same rights as them to bend their lives around their own prejudice. The rioters in Baltimore have silenced the sane. In the above quote, King said that a “large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity.” While I don’t believe it is just a segment of white society anymore, I believe that there are a disturbingly large number of people in the United States, of all colors, that can see what has happened to many individuals and dismiss both justice and humanity in their reactions. Look at the white man (I can’t even think of his name because he hasn’t been in the news… Imagine that) who was kicked numerous times by a handful of officers, even after he surrendered. 11 officers stood around him as he was needlessly beaten. They dismiss justice and humanity, not because of their color, but because of the custody they were in. I happen to believe that Freddie Gray deserves an investigation, and that Police throughout the U.S. should be subject to external investigations when someone dies in such a horrific manner on their watch, whether it was caused by police or not. Countless cases have been filed under a fancy title for “oops,” well that doesn’t fly when someone ends up 6 feet below. If Freddie Gray was taken on a “rough ride,” and they find that it caused his injuries, action should be taken. Unfortunately, that is where the system fails us so often. The officers involved do not break code on one another, and while they may have witnessed a wrong doing, it is unthinkable to rat on your brethren – especially in Baltimore.
Protests in Baltimore have been necessary for a while now. Actually, I think many of the very public police custody deaths this year and last were worthy of protests. Not because all cops are bad, but because the majority of cops are good and deserving of a better image. Justice should be blind to color, as well as the badge. The city of Baltimore has had to pay out nearly 6 million dollars to victims of brutality since 2011. Civil rights cases are being won; cases involving a Grandmother, church deacon, and even a pregnant woman. The Grandmother had her shoulder broken because she refused to let officers in her home without a warrant; she refused to let officers of the law violate her 4th Amendment rights, and for that she was abused. That could be any of us. The brutality cases towards people and pets, as well as corruption cases during a 4 year span in Baltimore should revolt anyone. We can all be stirred by emotion when we see a photo of an officer lovingly working alongside a black child in the streets of Baltimore (I know I was), but it shouldn’t mute a very large underlying problem. A problem that costs taxpayers millions of dollars in settlements, and a problem that has removed rights away from hundreds of individuals; rights you claim to support.
In one case, a police officer was cooperating with prosecutors on a police brutality case and found a dead rat on his windshield. The good cops can help their image by showing the true nature that we know they possess. Sure, we hear stories all the time of hero cops who help the needy, play with underprivileged kids, and purchase groceries for those struggling. Those are all incredibly commendable acts, and I share their stories… but I would really like to see cops start calling each other out on cases such as those listed above; there are other citizens who desperately need them. When will we stop seeing the police as a group, and start seeing them as individuals? We don’t silence rape cases because the majority of men are decent. We don’t protect soldiers from prosecution because the vast majority of them are selfless heroes. Why do we shield bad cops because the majority are good? It makes no sense, not even in the slightest bit. There are two cops, at minimum, in those police vans during “rough rides,” at least one of them has to know that they’re doing something barbarically inhuman. The fact that “rough rides” is a well known term in the Baltimore PD speaks wonders to the fact that a lot of good cops know what is happening, but remain silent. 16 Baltimore officers were convicted in a kickback scheme with a towing company. Others have been found guilty of lying on search warrants, selling heroin, and protecting drug dealers. Another case involved an officer that threw a man down so hard that his spleen ruptured, Yet good officers are subject to bully tactics, and manipulated into believing that their guilty “brother” is above the law. Gray was allegedly given a “rough ride” in the back of a police van (investigation is pending on whether that caused his death), these same “rough rides” have caused other citizens to become paralyzed. The “rough rides” are not a rare occurrence, hence the coined term. This type of malicious behavior happens in other cities as well, and should not be tolerated. The brave officers who step up should not have to face dead rats on their windshields, yet that is where we are. It reminds me of a quote from The Chicago Code, the officer was telling a story about how he used to be bullied, and says that being bullied is why he “joined the biggest and toughest gang in the world.” That’s the mentality we want to share with kids? What happened to Andy Griffith? I don’t know about you, but I want Andy to show up at my house if I need an officer. I want Andy to be the one that my nephew looks up to and trusts.
Unpopular opinion: If peaceful protests were taking place around our country to curb police brutality, bring in independent investigations (as Republican Scott Walker did), and require all police to wear body cameras, I would be marching along with them. Maybe if Democrat Mayor Rawlings-Blake would have supported body cameras like Republican Sen. Tim Scott, we’d know exactly what happened to Freddie Gray; unfortunately, Blake vetoed a bill that would have made them mandatory. My opinion doesn’t even come close to saying that all police officers are bad people – nor that I’m anti-cop – it is to say that the good need to start speaking out, and the bad need to be stripped of the protection they currently have from our state and fellow officers. If this took place, I guarantee that we would see the relationships between officers and citizens take a positive turn, and it would rebuild trust. Yet, we are so scared to even touch this subject that our friends and families act like we’ve just told them that we’re joining the Nazi party when we demand responsibility from those who deal in life and death situations. Families – white families – in Wisconsin faced persecution for their political leanings, officers rushed into homes following orders for absolutely no reason. One even saying, “Some days I hate my job.” Yet he still did it. Friends – I can’t stress this enough – police officers work for the state. Wonderful, decent, hardworking, heroic, brave men and women in uniform work for the state, and it is our job to control the state.
Now, some have said that there weren’t any peaceful protests in Baltimore… Well, that’s just silly. Of course there were peaceful individuals trying to protest respectfully, but they were muted by the mob of thugs who victimized an entire city with no remorse. They were victimized by a mob that pretends to know the first thing about rights as they trample on the rights of others, and harm officers that did nothing to them. They are wrong, and we’ve been wrong and uncaring. Americans are short sighted; we see the debacles in Ferguson and Baltimore and think that increasing the power of the state is the answer, when really the answer was to decrease the roll of the state long ago.
So, to the point: #BlackLivesMatter perpetuators, King didn’t encourage this kind of “communication,” but instead said it harmed the cause. In addition, #BlueLivesMatter perpetuators, he didn’t preach on supporting police custody “rough rides,” “nickel rides,” etc… His words were the words of a man who wanted justice for all people, punishment for crimes committed against all people, fair investigations for all victims, blind justice for all. #EveryLifeMatters! Refusal to admit that both sides are capable of having issues has annihilated sanity. Yesterday I shared a post that said, “Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on the bus, she didn’t trash the bus.” Rosa Parks didn’t harm the innocent, burn down buildings, attack police officers, etc. but she also had a darn good reason to stand her ground.
Buildings are burning, lives are ruined, and many will accuse me of callously bringing up some of the issues in my post when officers are lying in hospital beds. I will return the favor and accuse you of callously disregarding the rights of individuals which set the stage for innocent people to be maimed or killed and innocent officers to be put in hospital beds. You’re absolutely right, now is not the time to talk about this, the time to talk about this was years ago when we laid the foundation for the destruction, death, and pain we are seeing today. The disaster on the streets of Baltimore is not just the fault of rioters, it is the fault of those who shaped their ideals. Does it make you feel better to blame their parents? Our political silence and refusal to care about a wrong has created a society that devalues human life. What could we have done to avoid this? I’m not letting the rioters off the hook, but I’m not letting you off the hook either. We approach issue in this nation with a new level of cowardice, and if we expect to change our nation, well, that must to change.
I’ve found that if I post something on police brutality I have just as many views in the stats, but the interaction is low. Why? Because people are scared of their friends seeing that they liked or shared a post that hinted at the idea that all of the men and women in uniform patrolling our streets are not gods. That we do have an issue that needs to be taken care of, and that officers of the law are human and still need to be held responsible. I would argue that I support the police more than you do, that I care about their well being more so than you, because I know that to improve the relationship they have with the people, we need to remove the gang mentality and remember that they are all human beings. We are a nation that thrives when we have mutual respect, but we will be a nation that falls if we only govern on fear tactics. I would also argue that those encouraging thugs to loot and harm innocent individuals are as harmful, if not more so, to the black populous than those who fought against equal rights. You are encouraging men and women to degrade themselves, attack the innocent, and embrace the hatred and pain involved in the racial narrative that you have perpetuated for your own gain. You should be ashamed.
Our hearts do not truly bear the resemblance of barbarians when we accept that Freddie Gray was an unrepentant criminal, but they will do so when we accept the idea that he never mattered, when he becomes a number. The hearts of the peaceful protesters that were involved, those who were truly seeking change, will not be hardened because a life was lost, they will be hardened when they see we no longer care.
FYI – Do you know who would be talking about both the obnoxious rioters and police overreach despite the cries of foul from the masses? Martin Luther King Jr… Remember that the next time you quote him.
The political winds taunt some, depress others, and are a wonderful excuse to go do the dishes during commercial breaks for many. I, on the other hand, love nothing more than the sweet scent of political conflict in the air. It’s the breeze of responsible, the reminder that we can all make a difference in our world. I am ready for 18 months, 2 weeks, and 3 days of brutal campaigns, insults, and shouts of joy. That said, It’s only been a few weeks, and I’ve already experienced all of those things. I’m not one to shy away from opinions, nor one to defend someone to the death despite a clear difference in beliefs. I am, however, a realist… Which brings me to the point of this post:
Who should you vote for?
WARNING: I’m about to discuss points and facts that I don’t, necessarily, even like. I’m about to tell you why some of my favorite people in politics can’t beat Hillary. I don’t like these facts, I despise many of them, yet I can’t get past them. So please don’t assume that I’m attacking your favorite candidate… Unless of course your favorite candidate is Hillary Clinton.
Despite the myriad reasons why Hillary shouldn’t be President, including the fact that if she were a Republican she’d more than likely be charged with a few crimes, she will most likely be the Democrat candidate of choice on the ballot in 2016. The woman could punch ducklings on live TV and still be worshipped by the left. They’re doing their best to make her seem human – “look, the elitist eats a burrito” – and they’ll succeed with those who really, really, really want her to be human…. Despite the fact that when she’s in public she looks like she’s either chronically constipated, or counting down the seconds before she is able to run to the nearest bottle of Germ-X so as to cleanse herself of commoner bacteria.
Hillary has a really good shot at the White House, because the average American voter is a glutton for punishment. They’re like an abused wife, captive to the idea that they won’t survive without a particular party in power. Yes, I compared the Democrat regime to an abusive husband. Luckily, for some of them, that’s a step up. Talking to you, Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Anthony Weiner… I digress. So follow me on this journey, let’s chat about what kind of competitor we need on our side to go up against the only “Feminist” to remain married to a womanizer and alleged rapist. I’m going to break down my reasons against/for the current candidates, as well as a few potentials.
Ted Cruz – Don’t you feel American when you listen to him? You feel good, you feel like he’s the second coming of Reagan. You just get the feeling like he belongs on a Presidential flashcard. Sometimes you might even accidently say “Ted Reagan” because it sounds fantastic. Wait… Is that just me? This man should have a soundtrack, and it should be Lee Greenwoods’ greatest hit on repeat. I’m pretty sure he smells like Apple Pie and baseball. I love this man, and I love what he stands for, and so do the handful, albeit large handful, of those in the country that land so far right they’ve got a poster of George Washington holding an AR-15 above their bed. So, what’s not to love about him? Well, quite simply, he’s not going to get the votes from the middle ground. If we lived in a sane America, filled with fiscally responsible adults, they’d see that he is the best chance for lowering the debt, elevating the lower class, etc…. Now, the Libertarians might not vote for Hillary, but they also won’t vote for him, they’ll either stay home, or they’ll vote for an Independent… And voting for an Independent is basically like casting your vote for the rich white chick in the pantsuit. If he wins the GOP ticket, I’ll slap a bumper sticker on my car and preach the good word, but he’s not my first choice.
Rand Paul – Oh, my heart. I love this man too. He’s a genuinely good person with a heart for his country. I really love the fact that he fights against the militarization of the police. He sees what I see, what many common sense individuals see; it shouldn’t be an us vs. them system, militarizing the police just damages the relationship they should have with the people of this nation. He believes that the warrior cop mentality is toxic. He believes in accountability, regardless of what uniform you wear. I have found myself siding with him on countless occasions where this is concerned. But there are staunch Republicans (I know many personally) that throw anyone who dares to stand for the rights of all people, not just the uniformed, under the bus. So while I may love him, many staunch Republicans will go full liberal and anti-rights if he says Andy Griffith can’t have a tank. That issue aside, I believe foreign policy is one of the most important issues in a Presidential candidate. I also believe that sometimes blood must be shed for the good of the innocent (WWI, WWII, ISIS, etc.), and I believe that America should defend the innocent. Hashtag diplomacy, well wishes, and minding our own business doesn’t always work. Understanding this is not Rand’s strong suit. He sounds like he’s changing his tune a bit on foreign policy, but with everything going on in this world, is it enough? On the plus side, most vehemently Republican voters will not like voting for Rand, but if he goes up against Hillary they’ll smarten up and vote for him because they’re still a step ahead of the Independents who really, really just want their weed, man. Unfortunately, he will garner very few votes from the minorities that Democrats have owned in the last 2 elections. Once again, I’ll buy a cap with his name on it if he makes the ticket, but he’s not my first choice.
Jeb Bush – No.
Chris Christie – No.
No. Stop it.
Seriously? I should not have to explain the faults in either of those choices. Have we not learned our lesson with McCain and Romney? Do we need to revisit the rich white guy camp again to play games with what might be the most important election our generation will see? Stop making me hate you, GOP. Stop it. Now. You need my generation, why are you bound and determined to push us away?
Scott Walker – Alright, this one pains me… I’m a Wisconsinite, and a proud supporter of Walker. This election is going to require more, it’s going to require someone with a story, someone with charisma, someone that relates. I support most of what Walker has accomplished, including his fight against union thugs. But Walker does not have the story, and he doesn’t have the charisma it will take to beat Hillary. True or not, her supporters will paint him as a “typical white Republican bully.” This election is going to be a difficult one, and we MUST learn from the past, or we’ll repeat it. If we run the same old campaigns of McCain and Romney, we’ll be listening to a concession speech by our candidate on election night. If he ends up running against Hillary, once again, I’ll be the first in line to support him… but… Scott Walker is not my first choice. Ouch.
Marco Rubio – Ready? Rubio is my first choice. And below is just a peek at why I believe he should be yours too (I will include excerpts from his recent announcement):
He’s not an old rich white guy. TMZ once asked him the difference between Lil Wayne and Tupac, and he answered by detailing the difference between the two rappers. He quoted Jay-Z on the House floor. This may mean nothing to you, because it means nothing to me, but it means something to the millions of new voters who can relate. He’s relevant. I know Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, and the likes don’t agree, but guess what… this country followed the lead of the Conservative leaders for long enough. We may agree with them, we may have the same opinions, we may own their books and tweet their quotes, but their choices have not given us results for quite a long time. Rubio is not Reagan, but I tend to believe that Reagan would have a difficult time getting elected these days.
“Here in America, my father became a bartender, my mother a cashier, a maid, a K-Mart stock clerk.” His parents had to budget, he had to budget. He just paid off his student loans in 2012. Do you know how long it’s been since Hillary Clinton had to worry about a budget? A loan payment? A very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very long time. She can stand in Chipotle until the cows come home, and it doesn’t change the fact that she is still going to walk away with a net worth that the majority of us will never see in a lifetime. This year alone, she’ll spend more on restaurants and clothes than I’ll ever spend on a house. She’s out of touch. Drastically out of touch. Her daughter is out of touch. And her husband needs reminders not to touch. This is where every other candidate fails to compare. Rubio can shoot Hillary’s class warfare back at her via cannon. He can paint her as an elitist who is completely out of touch with the rest of the world, including himself, and then he can drop a quote from Public Enemy and bury her, no other candidate can offer that, and if they tried they’d just look like that weird 50 year-old neighbor who has “JUICY” printed in glitter across the butt of her sweatpants. You don’t want to hear that, Conservatives, but buck up, Buttercup, it’s a fact.
“They’re busy looking backwards. So they do not see how jobs and prosperity today depend on our ability to compete in a global economy. And so our leaders put us at a disadvantage by taxing and borrowing and regulating like it was 1999.” In case you didn’t get the point, Marco Rubio is young and relevant. Hillary isn’t. McCain preached on how he could help you, Romney preached on how he could help you, Rubio is not speaking down to you, he is one of you.
“If we reform our tax code and reduce regulations and control spending and modernize our immigration laws and repeal and replace Obamacare.”
Taxes – I love the opinion of Cruz concerning taxes, I also love the opinion of Paul concerning taxes, and Reagan, and Coolidge, and, and, the list goes on. Guess how much good those views do if Hillary is in the White House? Wishful thinking is grand, and I’ll be a flat tax supporter until I die. *wipes away single tear* However, we are dealing with the struggle of earning votes from individuals who will give their support to a candidate based off of clips of Presidential debates between Lady Gaga and Katy Perry songs on the radio. If you asked the majority of the people in this country what “flat tax” means, they’ll look at you like your finger is glowing and wonder if you need to “phone home.” If Rubio gets in the White House and tax cuts take place, jobs grow, and people see that their livelihood improves, he can then run on even more tax cuts, and other Republicans will have the ability to tout even more drastic ideas without the majority disregarding them. Did you know that in a recent poll, roughly 29% of Americans believe that less taxes on the wealthy will help the economy? That’s it. So, if you and that 29% (which includes myself) think you can magically win an election by touting tax breaks for the rich, then have it. We will have much better luck using someone like Rubio to get our foot in the door and soften opinions.
Immigration Laws – Uh oh. There are Conservatives who jumped head first into a rather silly pool of pandemonium the moment that Rubio suggested that a path to citizenship for illegals already in America is the right thing to do, while also saying that the current laws need to be upheld, and that control is needed at the borders. I’ll admit, I wasn’t thrilled myself, but at the time I failed to see how it would benefit him. While you have your breakdown and proclaim your refusal to support him, I’m just going to sit over here sipping my coffee and wonder how many voters the smooth talking Cuban Senator just stole from the Democrats by not fitting into the cold and calculated mold that the liberal narrative has built for Republicans. Go ahead. Pitch your fit, but ol’Marco gained votes that no one else in the GOP will ever touch, like a boss. Besides, apart from a ‘wetback roundup’ (go ahead, support someone who pushes that ideal and pave the way for Hillary), giving established extended families a conditional chance at staying is almost the only tangible and conservative thing left to do.
Obamacare – He wants to repeal it, most people hate it, and by the time 2016 rolls around even more people will hate it. I really don’t think more needs to be said on this.
“I live in an exceptional country where the son of a bartender and a maid can have the same dreams, and the same future as those who’ve come from power and privilege.” Oh snap. He went there. While popular Democrats have in recent year felt the need to remind us that without immigrants we wouldn’t have proper lawn care (no joke), and even our current President referred to them as “fruit pickers,” Marco Rubio is here to say that they can be President.
He speaks fluent Spanish. “Not a big deal,” you might say? It’s a very big deal. Because while our President is calling immigrants “fruit pickers,” Rubio’s Cuban immigrant father came home from working as a bar tender after midnight most nights and told his son, in Spanish, that “In this country you will achieve all the things we never could.” That’s a substantial difference. “The final verdict on our generation will be written by Americans who have not yet been born. Let us make sure they record that we made the right choice. That in the early years of this century, thanks to the rapidly changing and uncertain world, our generation rose to face the great challenges of our time. And because we did — because we did there was still one place in the world where you — where who you come from does not determine how far you go.” This doesn’t move Ann Coulter, it doesn’t move Glenn Beck, it doesn’t move Hannity, Limbaugh, Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, etc. but it does move the kid that grew up in Harlem, it resonates with the woman who grew up translating for her parents, it has the power to move the young voters who feel like the politicians and the media can’t relate to them. Scott Walker can attack the unions, Ted Cruz can tout the NRA and filibuster, and Rand Paul can support liberty like none other, and they all do an outstanding job, but not one of them can relate to the young minority vote in the way Marco Rubio can.
Other candidates tend to want to slide their arm across the table, knocking all of the dominoes down in one sweep, and in no particular order. I want to do the same, but what I want will not work. Rubio is very good at being strategic, he plants dominoes to fall at just the right time. We need that.
He’s being asked difficult questions and he answering them in ways that are making the MSM implode. For example, he was asked about Evolution (since he’s a Christian) and he responded with, “It’s a scientific theory that should be taught.” Another example: A reporter recently asked if 43 was old enough to be President, Rubio responded with, “I know 44 is, which is what I turn in May.” People feel that he is inexperienced, but I tend to wonder if those people have been paying attention to politics lately. That’s not going to hurt his chances in anyway whatsoever. Maybe someday when we are back on track we will live in a matured America where people do care about the experience of a Presidential candidate, but it’s time that we face the fact that today is not that day. The left is terrified of Rubio, not so much Cruz and Rand, and that is very evident, and it’s also something we should be watching. This tells us that they confidently have their arguments against Cruz and Rand locked and loaded, guarded by a trigger happy MSNBC lapdog. However, with Rubio they’re scrambling for something, anything!They’re shooting blind and hoping that something hits… And he’s just smooth enough to pull a Matrix and avoid any fatal shots. Unfortunately, many on the right are too busy applying their Ted Cruz bumper stickers to notice.
Now, after noting all of the obvious pros, here are a few things that I would really like to see from Rubio:
The Republican party isn’t sexist, that’s a fact. I mean come on, the party labeling us as “sexist” has numerous affairs, alleged rapes, and a body count in the war on women (Thanks, Ted…). The important thing to remember is that with Hillary, we aren’t fighting facts, we are fighting a narrative. If Rubio wins the GOP ticket, he needs to pick a woman as his Vice. Nikki Haley, Suzanna Martinez, etc… He needs a calm, smart, and articulate woman who can speak to the importance of the most understated and misunderstood woman’s right; The right to carry.
Democrats are starting to come out of the woodwork concerning Marijuana legalization. They don’t care. Seriously, they don’t care. The only reason we are seeing this – most recently in Wisconsin – and will continue to see this, is because they want Conservative candidates to look old and distant. When questioned, Rubio should default to the Constitution. “It should be left to the states and has nothing to do with the Presidential election.” And then give the, “Why are you even asking me such a silly question” face. It won’t be long before marijuana is legalized nationwide, taking a hardline stance will only push the younger votes away.
When asked about women’s rights, I want him to speak to women. I want him to look at the media and say that he’s sick and tired of politicians and the media insulting the intelligence of women. That equality laws are on the books, and touting additional legislation, and pretending as though women can’t understand any of the real issues that have to do with the Presidential election, is an insult to women. Simply saying, “it’s already illegal to discriminate” only addresses the issue, it doesn’t address the stereotype that Republicans care little about women. We need to turn the tables. We need to show that they are attacking women by assuming that we will believe their nonsense. He needs to speak like an original Feminist. The original Feminists believed that women were an intellectual equal, and showed distain for those who thought we were self-indulged jackwagons that couldn’t handle the difficult topics. Well, we aren’t, and Rubio needs to fight on our behalf against that narrative. Rand Paul has started doing this, Rubio should take note.
I’ve heard the following since expressing my opinions of the above with numerous people:
“You’re crazy! How can Hillary win with Benghazi in her past?” – How did Obama win reelection with Benghazi in his VERY recent past? Good rule of thumb: Don’t underestimate your enemy, and don’t overestimate the bleeding hearts of their voters. If Hillary Clinton went surfing on a pile of dead puppies, but was wearing a Planned Parenthood t-shirt, she’d still get a disturbingly large number of votes from those who claim to “care.”
“How can Hillary win with Bill as her baggage?” – How was Ted Kennedy’s name mentioned at the 2012 DNC without the large feminist attendance all projectile vomiting as they went running towards the door? He let a woman die slowly in a sinking vehicle to hide his dirty little secret and avoided punishment, yet feminists still get joyfully verklempt when they get the chance to celebrate his glorious name. There really are stupid questions, and we need to stop asking them, and start embracing the truth. We need to all sit down and watch Karate Kid and learn to know the opponent. Embrace the enemy. Be the ignorant whiny underpaid contraceptiveless needy feminist with a degree in gender studies, Grasshopper.
“How can Hillary possibly win with the server debacle?” – Because she has a vagina, and a (D) beside her title. No seriously, that’s why.
“Won’t people see her horrible foreign policy?” – This morning I read an article about the guy that served her a burrito at Chipotle, and it wasn’t satirical. The article is not important, hilarious, but not important. However, the existence of this article is important. This woman is a celebrity, and I guarantee you that the majority of the individuals that vote for her will know exactly what she prefers in her burritos, but they will have no idea if she even knows how to point to Iran on a map.
Now, we can listen to the Conservative voices that are praising every other candidate, and some are even throwing Rubio under the bus. We can pick one of the other candidates, and I’ll vote for them, support them, and even be positive about the fight… But I sincerely hope that people vote Rubio, because I believe he is our best shot. I hope we all research his position on issues without flying off the handle like we did on Amnesty. Heck, he may do something really stupid before November 2016, I doubt it, but crazier things have happened. If that’s the case, I’ll gladly sit down and cover my words in hot sauce before dining on them. I don’t know the future, and I may be forced to change my tune, but as of right now… well… Rubio has my vote, and he should have yours too.
There. I think I covered everything. Wait. One more thing. Whatever you do, please don’t pick Bush or Christie, because if you do, this will be me during Hillary’s inauguration:
Some idiot, and the idiot is me, set my alarm clock to the sound of a duck. I guess I thought that, due to my propensity to sleep through tornado sirens, an odd sounding alarm would do the trick… and what better than the joyful sound of a duck. That’s a rhetorical question, for I now have a list of sounds that would in fact be better to wake up to than a duck, and dying cats is one of them. BUT, the important point is that it did indeed do the trick, and I woke up on time. It also made me spend my entire drive to work fantasizing about the various ways in which a duck can be killed. I came up with hundreds during my 20 minute drive, people. Hundreds. And I got creative.
The above serves absolutely no purpose other than to a) creep you out, and b) show you what kind of mood I was in while getting ready this morning and reading Facebook posts and tweets. Everyone has an opinion about the ISIS controversy, and now I have foundation on my pants after reading a post and dropping my bottle in utter shock of the stupidity. (SIDE NOTE: Due to my lack of energy, we’ll blame it onducks, I didn’t change my pants.) The person that made the comments on this particular status – which was simply one of many people making similar comments & posts – has no idea what his ignorance made me do, nor that my extra cup of coffee this morning was named after him. Seriously, I wrote his name on my McDonalds coffee cup. You’re welcome, Sir. Petty? Yes. But I was tired, and now have to work off an extra cup of coffee containing copious amounts of sugar and cream, as well as remove a foundation stain, because of this particular person. And of course ducks. Can’t forget about the ducks.
“Why is the name —– on your coffee cup?”
“Oh, curious coworker, let me tell you.”
Ok, so this particular person took to Facebook to attack fellow Christians for wanting to take out ISIS. After thoroughly mocking those who want to stop ISIS from beheading human beings, he quoted this set of verses.
“38“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. 43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighborand hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” – Matthew 5:38-48
First I’d like to point out that it’s a bit difficult to turn the other cheek when someone has removed your head. Second, this verse is talking about the victim forgiving, not the people that should step in and stop the madmen from decapitating infants with dull blades. But you know, context is overrated. I adore this verse, it reminds me that I need to forgive the person on my coffee cup, for I was a victim of his dumb comment, or my pants were, maybe they should turn the other cheek (Pun intended? Maybe.)? I’ll need to mull this over.
My favorite so far though is “ISIS needs the gospel more than anyone else.” That is a HUGE assumption. It’s such a big assumption that if I assume unicorns exist, I’d have better odds. Sin is sin, and all fall short. So technically radical ISIS members, while barbarians, are on par with the rest of the world in their need for salvation, including those that are being beheaded by them. Yes, many Christians are being attacked and killed, but many non-Christians are as well. I’d say it’s pretty even if you look at news reports. Since the brave and threatening hashtag diplomacy has taken over, innumerable non-Christians have been beheaded or murdered in some other grotesque way. So basically you’re saying that one group of non-Christians deserves to hear the gospel more than another. Maybe I didn’t read the bible correctly, but from what I understand, when they stand in judgment, those non-believing victims will be held to the same accountability standards as members of ISIS for their unbelief. So claiming that radical members of ISIS somehow need Jesus more is weak and silly, and kind of revolting if you think about it.
Most of these eye opening revelations that I’ve read have, shockingly, come from recent graduates who majored in theology, and now they know everything there is to know about the bible. And most of them believe that God himself predetermined the beheadings, that’s a whole different kettle of fish, and they can make it sound really good if you just give them a chance. Yes, Christians, our churches are filled with people who believe that God Himself orchestrated the beheading of infants. This, my friends, is why I have a “Top 10 Reasons Why We Deserve What’s Coming” list. Many of them have attacked Phil Robertson for saying that “In this case you have to convert them, which I think would be next to impossible, I’m not giving up on them, I’m just saying convert them or kill them. One or the other.” What a hillbilly, am-I-right?! So yes, I’m going to call out the multiple Christians that had huge threads on their timelines that were solely devoted to mocking Phil Robertson for his comment. Not talking about the heartbreaking acts that are taking place in Iraq, no, they were simply saving the world 1 Phil Robertson joke at a time. I even saw some Sarah Palin, George Bush, and Sean Hannity jokes that were thrown in for good measure. I know that Phil didn’t swallow a thesaurus and make his basic argument unnecessarily indigestible so as to appear to be of higher intellect than the fumbling Christians that didn’t spend such intense time (2-4 years) in theological studies – she says sarcastically – but he makes a point, guys.
Last night I made a post about our President’s comments concerning his goal to make ISIS manageable. I won’t comment on that in this post, but I will post a comment that I received on that post. In my post I loosely compared radical members of ISIS (I’m going to talk about the “radicalized” part later in this post) to the Nazi regime. The following comment hit the nail on the head:
“And even so, the Nazi mentality – while also purely evil – was more ideological and less religious zealousness. They (the foot soldiers) were willing to fight for the cause but if overwhelmed, overwhelmingly surrendered.The ISIS extremists are – toa person – jihadists who would die for the cause. They are not reluctant soldiers enlisted by their government. They are – each and every one of them – martyrs willing to do what it takes to eradicate the Israelites, the Christians, the Westerners, the enemies of “Islam”, far more willing to die than to face the shame of surrender. There won’t be stories of Christmas truces of both sides meeting in the trenches to sing Silent Night. In order to preserve innocents and innocence, and quite frankly to be good stewards, I agree- They must be met head on. Enough force to turn back an opponent whose only goal and only acceptable outcome is to kill, is to kill first.”
This person avoided having his name written on my coffee cup.
So, let’s break this down by answering 4 important questions:
1. What does “radical” Islam even mean?
I’ve had a lot of well-meaning believers tell me that they have friends who are peaceful Muslims, and they use the term “radical” – as I did above – to describe those that act in violence. This is all fine and dandy, except that you open doors to be labeled a “radical” yourself simply by following the bible. While the Old Testament contains violence, which those defending peaceful Muslims are quick to point out, there is a big difference between the Quran and the Bible. The verses in the Quran are not restrained by historical context, they remain open ended.
“I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them” – Quran (8:12)
“And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder/unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah” – Quran (8:39)
The Quran then goes on to chastise those who are not willing to pick up the sword against those who don’t follow him. So, what we label as “radicals” are actually individuals who are taking the Quran seriously. Those that we label as “peaceful” simply don’t adhere as strictly to the Quran. Following the basic tenants of the Quran are “radical.” So if 80% of Muslims are simply “less devout,” does that truly make the other 20% “radicals”? Yes & no… Having extreme views that aren’t widely shared? Yes. Different and new from what is traditional? No. The 20% who are “radical” walk the walk. So, by standing for traditional marriage, you are a radical Christian if going by the same standards that you place on Islam. Let’s all be happy for once that the majority of human beings don’t strictly adhere to the principles of their religion.
2. Why do you hate Muslims?
I don’t. Let me repeat: I DON’T HATE MUSLIMS. I’m just trying to point out the holes in so many of these weak arguments. “I have Muslim friends” is not anywhere close to being a strong argument for your beliefs. I’m not attacking your friends.
According to various reports, the percentage of “radicals” is anywhere between 15-25%. Low, right? No, in comparison to the Nazi Regime, the Soviet Union, etc. that is high. The other 80% do not matter. I don’t need to hear about your friends, because I am well aware that there are plenty of Muslims living in America that aren’t waiting to behead me when they get the chance. I’m sure they like long walks on the beach, dinner parties, and movie nights. I am aware of the fact that many Muslims serve in the military. I’m also aware that they don’t matter. The Muslims that do matter, are the 15-25% that do want to behead me, as well as anyone that doesn’t agree with them, if they get the chance. They matter. There are incredibly peaceful atheists living in our world, they’re not important in discussions chastising Hitler. The “peaceful” Muslims, Germans, Russians, etc. are irrelevant. This is the same issue that I have with law enforcement – Stop touting good cops during police brutality discussions, because unless they are standing up and fighting against militarization, or police brutality, they are irrelevant to the debate.
Peaceful Germans stood by and watched millions of Jews be slaughtered, so, are they relevant to the bodies bulldozed into landfills? Nope. End of story. If your Muslim friends would like to come out against ISIS, Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood, etc. I’d love to hear their opinions and offer my support, but don’t use them as your version of the race card to try and say that we shouldn’t attack those that are relevant, as well as the book that they use to justify their killing.
3.They aren’t always like this, right?
A lot of people yelled and screamed about the Iraq war, some didn’t agree that we should have been involved over there at all due to the cost, or felt that it was wrong to retaliate. Some really special people actually believed that George Bush orchestrated it all, bless their hearts. I’m not addressing those viewpoints – even though I have opinions of my own. I’m addressing the fact that much of the push back was due to the fact that news crews were interviewing Iraqis that were on their laptops in more developed communities, and they – as if on cue – whined to the media that America was haphazardly murdering civilians. Kind of like Hamas has done with the IDF? Hmmm…
Anyway, the truth? It is very common during non-war times, just as it is now, for women to be raped, murdered, abused, etc. legally in many Middle Eastern areas. They are not equal with men, and are viewed as property. It is normal for Homosexuals to be found guilty and receive a death penalty. It is normal for Christians to be heavily persecuted. It is also normal for Muslims that strictly adhere to the teachings of their religion to teach their children to do the same. They are raised with a hatred for Israel, as well as Western civilization, and a willingness to die for their faith. Not in a “I’ll die before I’ll deny my God” type of willingness, but a “I’ll sacrifice myself to do Allah’s calling” type of willingness. They are not simply confined to the ME, either. We have seen honor killings on American soil, and beheadings in the UK. Families that legally move here, then daughters slaughtered for becoming too “westernized,” why? Because they strictly adhere to their religion, and while they might not be planning terrorist attacks, this is what their strict beliefs demand of them. Once again, I’m not speaking against your peaceful Muslim friends, I’m just throwing out information concerning radicals.
4. Shouldn’t we turn the other cheek?
Firstly, the above was a horrid use of Matthew 5: 38-48, and I really wish people would stop abusing it. In a world filled with evil people, often times war is necessary. Otherwise, think of the millions of additional human beings that would have been slaughtered under Hitler and Stalin, and imagine how much longer African Americans would have been held under slavery. War should never be fun, we shouldn’t look forward to killing individuals, but we should indeed be prepared and willing to protect the innocent, by lethal means if necessary, because they are willing to die before letting you save the innocent. Right now subhuman savagery is taking place, and has been taking place for a long time in the Middle East. So, say what you will, but the God of the bible, the lover of justice, and the one that condoned war on many occasions, would not tell you to “turn the other cheek” while watching madmen saw off someone’s head. The truly detestable and facepalm worthy moment for Christians is when they act like turning the other cheek while the actual victims suffer is somehow a sacrifice and showing of decent fruit on their part. And when you do something that heartless and stupid, you rightfully earn a place on my coffee cup.
As we learn in the Quran, they are not interested in peace. They are not interested in ending the suffering. They are interested in conversion or annihilation. Someone made this point on one of the posts I read this morning, and it was countered with “but you want to do the same thing to them!” Not true, not even close to true. I don’t want to annihilate all Muslims, I don’t want to annihilate anyone, I want them to stop slaughtering others, and due to their adherence to their scripture – which unlike ours, demands them to slaughter – the only way to do that is to take out the individuals who are slaughtering innocents. They were given another option, they do not give us another option. That’s like saying that the person who shoots a mass murderer while trying to stop him is somehow guilty of the same crime that the murderer was committing. No. The murderer had a choice to do what was right, the one defending wasn’t given a choice. It’s not “like” that scenario, people, it IS that scenario. Is that saying that we should proclaim war against the moderate Muslims, the less devout in our own country? Absolutely not.
The point of all of this:
I’m tired of beating around the bush. I’m done beating around the bush. While you sit peacefully in your living room patting yourself on the back for touting the “turn the other cheek” argument – and again, inaccurately so – the actual victims are facing quite a different reality. Imagine with me for a moment that the non-Christian victims can hear your words of pacifism. I wonder how impressed they would be with the children of God for bravely typing “I have to turn the other cheek” in response to their suffering, major emphasis on “their.” Stop pretending like our God is a pacifist, because according to the bible, He isn’t.
Forgive me for my bluntness, but the church needs to wake up, specifically the deeply intellectual hippy-esque theological demigods, and they need to do it yesterday. It’s not about left or right, or situating yourself somewhere in the middle so that you can point to the middle and brag, it’s about right and wrong. Period.
“This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears he is a protector.”
This morning I read two different stories involving police officers, and both speak wonders. The first story rightly labeled a local police officer as a hero after he bravely rescued a woman from drowning. I thoroughly enjoyed reading the article and left a “thank you” to the brave police officer in the comments section. It was nice to read something positive after all of the negative that has been filling my timeline lately. Then a comment made by another woman on that same article made me doubt the human race once again. This peculiar commenter made it known that she would love to see people that post police overreach articles face this brave young hero. Basically, she dared anyone to say anything negative about any other police officer because the man that saved a woman from drowning had a badge.
I can’t wait to start posting articles about heroic civilians and follow it up with, “I’d love to see those who speak out against child abuse and rape face these heroes.”
“Please remove this article about sex trafficking, my husband just so happens to be a man, and this paints all men as sex addicted monsters.”
“Please remove this article about Andrea Yates, my Mom is a mother, and this paints all mothers as psychopaths.”
“Please remove this article about how bad aspects of the public education system can be, my wife is a teacher.”
“Please remove this article about being careful when getting in a stranger’s car, my husband picks up hitchhikers and delivers them home safely.”
Do you know why bad things happen to people? Because bad people usually use the same techniques that good people happen to use, just for different reasons. Don’t justify your silence on issues by saying there are good people, it just allows the bad to continue deceiving, sometimes even turning the good people into tools for bad. Hence this blog post.
The second story I read was revolting and should leave everyone outraged.
In 2012 a police officer was arrested for planning to kidnap, torture, rape, kill, and eventually cannibalize his victims. He had used the NYPD database to track his potential victims, and had detailed out and established his plans in chat rooms and phone calls. He had even brought on coconspirators to help him be successful, he even brought the idea of harming his wife into the debacle. His google searches included “How to knock out someone with chloroform.” Yet, the acts of this monster amazingly have nothing to do with today’s blog post; however, what happened to him does indeed relate to today’s blog post. He walked this week. He was sentenced to 1 year, time served, for using the perks of his job to hunt down his potential victims. 1 year. *taps on microphone* 1 year.
He faced less time for conspiring to barbeque a woman while she was still alive, after the brutal rape he had planned for her, than an 18-year-old would spend for having sex with his 16-year-old girlfriend. I’m not justifying statutory rape, I’m just demonstrating how the magic a badge holds in the courtroom can make David Copperfield look like a hobo playing shell games on a street corner.
So, to the point: I’ve let the idea for this blog post mull around in my brain for a few months. I wasn’t sure how to approach such a divisive topic, I wasn’t sure how to avoid being offensive, etc. but honestly, at this point, I’m not going to squander time designated for perfectly good sleep worrying about whether people can have an adult conversation about a legitimate issue, or if they’re going to go Stephanie Tanner stompy foot on me. Life is short, I have a lot of opinions, and this isn’t going to be the last viewpoint that makes enemies.
Topic: Police Overreach (Insert Jaws theme music here)
So, I kind of feel like I kicked a puppy just by flirting with the idea of going towards this topic. Immediately upon reading this many people will say, “Oh yeah, well let’s see who she calls when someone breaks into her house!!”
I’m going to go ahead and answer that question: The cops. Because I’m not anti-cop, I’m anti-Police State. Oh, and that’s sort of their original purpose, as opposed to being suited up like The Terminator to go investigate a joint.
No, I’m not going to apologize if adults can’t talk about real issues without a bias that causes them to lash out at people, even if what those individuals are saying is logical. I’m not even going to back down when confronted by those who want to voice their frustrations because they have friends and family in law enforcement, because I do too.
Hey, finish reading, and if you disagree, I would love to discuss it with you via email, or in the comments section.
The barricade that keeps us from solving issues:
Conservatives have a tendency of behaving like liberals when it comes to certain conversations that need to be had; guarding certain topics better than they would the holy grail. I was blocked by a police officer after having a discussion concerning police brutality, apparently discussing a legitimate issue is no longer permitted. This is like men getting mad if you discuss the issue of rape, because they have the same tools that were used in the crime.
Quite frankly, I’m getting sick and tired of saying anything about our need to reduce the police state mentality only to have people assume that I have a Guy Fawkes mask in my purse, and that I belong in zip-tie handcuffs. Come on now, People… Now I finally understand why I rarely find a logical article on the subject! Either you have articles worshipping law enforcement, or you have articles showing complete distain for law enforcement, or you have the articles that are never written because sane individuals approach the topic only to be taken on a guilt trip to the land of heroic stories, where the rivers of bravery floweth, and the dangerous changes taking place in our society are forgotten.
Seriously, I love the police. I appreciate the police. I just want to request that our law enforcement simply do what they were originally designed for before 1984 becomes prophetic.
On that note:
In 2011 Jose Guerena was shot 22 times while standing in his kitchen. The 26-year-old man was an Iraq veteran who had returned home and was now working the night shift at a mine. After seeing a suspicious person by their house, he put his wife and child in a closet and took his gun out to investigate. A SWAT team riddled his body with bullets while in search of drugs throughout the neighborhood. His home did not have any drugs, and the only marijuana found by the SWAT team was a small bag located in another home.
Reminder: A cannibalistic police officer is unencumbered, and probably fantasizing and enjoying a beer right now while this veteran is in a grave.
In 2010 a 7-year-old little girl was badly burned by a flashbang grenade that was thrown into the window of a her home, landing on her blanket. She was instantly disoriented and unable to hear and follow orders, a member of the SWAT team then entered the home and her life was ended with a single shot in the wake of all the madness.
Just this past May, a no knock SWAT raid ended with a 2-year-old child being thrown into a medically induced coma after have a flashbang grenade land in his crib. A search for drugs that weren’t even found in the home, a home that the suspect didn’t even reside in, ended with an innocent child having a gaping chest wound.
That’s just a sampling. All around the United States the Fourth Amendment is violated because people don’t know their rights, and men in uniform are either ignorant of those rights themselves, or they are taking advantage of the fact that many citizens are oblivious. Yet if you mention this fact, you might as well have said that dogs don’t go to heaven, and baby ducks should be thrown in wood chippers.
In a press conference held in February of this year, concerning the ridiculous arrest of a jogger that was “resisting arrest,” or in reality, wearing headphones that made her unable to hear the cop shout at her after she jaywalked (no joke,) one police chief actually said, “In other cities there’s cops who are actually committing sexual assaults on duty, so I thank God that this is what passes for a controversy…” This girl was placed on the ground and handcuffed while she cried and begged them to understand that she didn’t do anything wrong.
I followed the comments section of an article on the jogger story and was amazed by the support from other officers for this, well, thug-like arrest. But it’s acceptable that the pigtailed jogger was a victim of police overreach, because well, she’s just lucky that she didn’t get sexually assaulted? That’s a logical defense? I mean, maybe in Soviet Russia, but here? Yes, the chief eventually admitted to the fact that he could have worded that better. By I’m going to throw “worded that better” out into the cold and replace it with, “should’ve never tried to justify it in the first place.”
I hate to go here, but…
No, that’s a lie. I’m pretty ok with going here. The greatest weapon that the Gestapo had in their power was fear. The people thought that the Gestapo had ears everywhere, could do what they wanted without repercussions, etc. and that fear gave the Gestapo the ability to actually do what they wanted without repercussions. Imagine that. They fed off of the ignorance of the people. They even leaked stories of brutality by police so as to put fear into the people. The “it could be worse for you” mentality was rampant, and the people simply wanted to stay safe, so they blindly complied.
I was listening to a video of a gun owner talking to a police officer. The police officer was in full agreement with the man concerning the fact that it was his right to carry his weapon. When the man asked the police officer why he didn’t just explain our rights to the concerned caller that had called the police, the officer eluded to the idea that they would rather not see a lot of people knowing that they can exercise those rights. The police are to blame for much of the anti-gun propaganda, they have aided in fueling so much of the fear surrounding guns…
SIDE NOTE: I’m not justifying the actions of those that are carrying long rifles into restaurants. My opinions on that will be in a different blog post.
Countless videos of civilians refusing a vehicle search are all over the net, and yet those conducting the searches find the ignorance of one’s own rights to be a benefit for the thousands of other cars searched without question. Unfortunately, even GOOD cops are being led down the road of the police state mentality. It’s the ends justifying the means again…But is that who America is? Is that what we want our country to be like? I’ll pass.
The video of a police officer supporting the rights of gun owners made the rounds as well, I shared it excitedly, and then realized that this shouldn’t be considered a “good deed,” it should be considered “their job.”
Let’s look at some facts:
Civilian body counts are rising:
In 2013, 33 police officers were killed in the line of duty. This is a horrid statistic, but it is also the lowest number since 1887. Facts are, crime is not increasing; actually, it is the contrary. Yet in 2012 (couldn’t find 2013 data yet) over 400 civilian deaths occurred, and that unprecedented statistic has continually been increasing since 9/11.
Crime has always existed, and shockingly, homicide rates are down! Taking into account population increase, technically the wild west – well before gun control laws – had the lowest homicide rate between 1880 – current day. Suddenly in the late 1890’s, early 1900’s, union-led gun control laws were enacted and the homicide rates skyrocketed, decreasing once again when prohibition was ending. Then after the JFK assassination, gun control laws were enacted again, and homicide rates skyrocketed.
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, as of 2013, the percentage of non-fatal gun crime victims dropped 75% since 1993, going from 725.3 victims per 100,000 in 1993 to 181.5 in 2011. Gun homicide rates dropped by 49%, going from 6.5 victims per 100,000 in 1990 to 3.6 in 2010. All in all, there has been little change in crime, there are some ups and downs, but it’s pretty clear that people have been breaking the law for a very long time (I mean come on, the first born human committed murder…). Funny enough, they tend to do it less when individuals carry weapons. Unfortunately, the numbers indicate that crime is not on the rise, police fatalities are not on the rise, and are actually on the decline, but police are more frequently resorting to violence.
Point being, we’ve been living in a corrupt society with psychopaths for quite a while, nothing is going to make that fact go away. The difference is simple – Now we have social media monitoring every move that societal bottom dwellers make. Stories that once upon a time didn’t even make it to a breaking news report across our TV, or the newspaper for that matter, now have a twitter hashtag before an ambulance arrives. Don’t get me wrong, staying informed is beneficial, but understanding the impact social media has had in our ability to hear about the crime is essential for our perspective. Crime is in your face more than ever, that doesn’t justify police overreach.
Scary statistic: More individuals have been killed by Police in the United States than soldiers have died fighting terrorism in the Middle East since the World Trade Center attacks.
Unwarranted Searches & Knowing Your Rights:
After the Boston bombing, Tsarnaev was on the loose. The police proceeded to search homes in Watertown, without warrant, and the occupants of said homes appeased them out of ignorance. This was a direct violation of our Fourth Amendment rights, but our government sold it as an attempt to protect us. As people answered their doors with their hands over their head (little too fearful???), law enforcement began their in-depth searches.
Everybody says, “If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.” And to those people I kindly ask that they get a history book.
According to the Department of Justice, you are 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist. Yet we actually have people defending no knock raids, and complete violations of the Fourth Amendment through unwarranted searches. They support the legal assaults that take place in airports on children and Grandmas. I live in a country where I can’t take my hairspray on a plane, but someone can troll the NYPD database looking for women to victimize and only serve a year in jail.
I’m going to need to blackout for a minute and digest that.
Alright, I’m back.
So, what changed? Police departments have become militarized. Originally, police officers were armed citizens who took on the responsibility of having arrest powers to protect the people. Now, they are more like a paramilitary organization. People fear American police more now than they ever have, and I had my concerns validated when a police officer said “Good!” when I mentioned that very fact. Officers have adopted a warrior mentality, and have assumed that the rest of the population consists of ignorant sheep. Looking at those they swore to protect and serve as enemies, or weaklings. Yes, many police officers give their lives in the line of duty, and many civilians are also killed recklessly. Could it be that it is everyone’s fault? If we are teaching officers to look at civilians as below them, or enemies, are we not just fueling the separation?
I’ve heard from many good hearted and conservative police officers that sincerely wish for civilians to be less armed. That’s not ok. It just means that we are failing the police officers being trained, because we clearly aren’t teaching them to respect the rights of citizens. Amazingly, when I talk to retired police officers they say the exact opposite. So, are we currently encouraging police officers to behave irresponsibly, to see innocent civilians as the potential enemy? I once heard a cop say, “I couldn’t care less what their rights are when I’m in the heat of the moment.” I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that this particular police officer probably should’ve chosen a different career path.
Police officers do not face the same justice system that civilians do:
If you kill a police dog, you will be charged with taking the life of an officer. Yet if a cop comes on to your property without a warrant and kills your animal, you’ll get to pay the vet bill to have them cremated.
I personally take great issue with this. I have a German Shepherd that is trained to guard my home, and she stays inside all day. She doesn’t know the difference between a cop breaking in, or Jeffrey Dahmer (apparently it could be both,) she just knows that it is her job to keep my home safe. I don’t like the idea that a police officer can get off the hook for slaughtering my dog if for some reason they decide to illegally enter my home, only to escape the justice system because they have a badge. If that’s the way it’s going to be going forward, law enforcement is going to become the career of choice for aspiring criminals, similar to how it was for the Gestapo.
SIDE NOTE: Yes, I read the adorable story of the cop that saved a dog and found its owners. Once again, that cop deserves a thank you. Interestingly enough, he recognized the poor image that the police now have with civilians concerning pets, and he made it a point to say that they all don’t behave that way. I give a sincere kudos to that officer.
If you are a police officer that is easily angered during police overreach discussions, you’re just increasing the chances that those listening will learn not to trust the police. Don’t defend criminals, even if they wear a badge, because that only gives us a substantiated reason to doubt whether your loyalty lies in protecting the innocent, or protecting whoever has a matching outfit.
If a group of mid-20’s blonde women with brownie batter addictions break in and rob a jewelry store, I’m not going to defend them because I’m a mid-20’s blonde woman with a brownie batter addiction. If you don’t want the world to act like the police are the largest gang in the United States, Hint: stop acting like it by pulling the gang loyalty card with the “Blue Code of Silence.” I get it, there is loyalty there, like in the military; However, let’s draw the line at say…oh, I don’t know…An unreasonable raid that left a 2 year-old with a gaping chest wound from a flashbang grenade. A woman that was stripped nude and pepper sprayed multiple times even after they had her in control behind bars. Or, maybe the unreasonable search of vehicles and homes without warrants?
I hope to see police officers bringing up these issues. If you are dedicated to protecting the people of the United States, why not call out those that are harming them, or those that are violating their rights?
Police, I want to work with you, because I am a law abiding citizen that hates crime. I want to see us be friends again, I don’t want to fear you when I don’t have a reason to do so, I don’t want to have to fear for my rights, I want you to know and understand them, and I want you to want the people of this country to know and understand their rights so that we can build a safer tomorrow. A tomorrow where we realize that a SWAT team is not necessary to apprehend little Billy’s weed stash.
To all of the police officers that respect the rights of the people, please let me express my gratitude. We need people like you on our side, I respect you, and I am thankful for your sacrifice. I appreciate the few that commented on some of those posts calling out your fellow brethren for violating the rights of the people. I don’t want the police to go away, I just want them to know their place in a free society. Contrary to both sides of the debate, respect and restraint are not antithetical.
Alright…I’ll take my lashings now. If by lashings you mean a piece of cake….or pie…I’m not picky.