The Collision Blog

I’m Not Supporting Ted Cruz: The Post I Never Wanted to Write — December 11, 2015

I’m Not Supporting Ted Cruz: The Post I Never Wanted to Write

First off, not everyone that reads my stuff is going to like this post. However, I’ve recently been negative towards Ted Cruz, and many people have questioned why I feel the way I do towards him, or have accused me of demonizing the opposition to boost my own candidate. A lot of people won’t agree with this post, and that’s alright. I write to put my opinions out there, and if people don’t agree I encourage dialogue. I love that we all have differing opinions, and while I may harshly criticize some of those differing opinions, I still encourage discussion.

First, here’s a sample of the replies I’ve received:

“I don’t get why you’re so negative about Ted Cruz?!?” 
“What’s your deal? Ted Cruz is a fighter, and we need a fighter!” 
“I don’t mind if you’re negative about Trump, but being negative about Cruz is just ridiculous.” 

I tried to address the Trump/Cruz connection in this post, but apparently I didn’t do a great job of explaining my previous political leanings and why I’m so irritated. Hopefully this post sheds some light, whether you agree or disagree in the end.

First, a bit of history. Here are a few tweets of mine from back in 2013:

Continue reading

Ronald Reagan: The Establishment RINO — September 2, 2015

Ronald Reagan: The Establishment RINO

What exactly does “Establishment GOP” even mean these days? I’ve pondered this question over and over, with little answer. From what I can gather, any conservative politician who identifies as a Republican is now a member of the “Establishment GOP,” with the exception of those running who lack any political record. Lack of experience now disqualifies you from being a member of this evil, maniacal cult of “Republican establishment hacks!” But wait, there’s more! You also must be rich enough to fund your own campaign, otherwise you are surely – without doubt – a filthy, soul sucking, America hating RINO.

As I write this, I’ve flipped over to Twitter to do a simple search.

00

These are the first 4 results:

Continue reading

Donald Trump: The Magic 8 Ball — July 27, 2015

Donald Trump: The Magic 8 Ball

“He’s loud, he’s proud, and he creates jobs!” The man, the myth, the reason why I might start drinking.

As I think back to the 2008 election, one moment in particular stands out; the moment in which I felt the most heartbroken and disappointed in the direction our country was heading. Before the results were ever tallied I listened to the exit poll interviews, and I remember hearing the crowds chant over the charismatic nature of the Democrat candidate, Barack Obama. I heard nary a word on what he planned to do to our country; the bowl of blithering nonsense before me was just a culmination of free phones, free contraceptives, charisma, and the color of his skin. I remember thinking, “This man is going to win, and no one knows what he stands for, they just know that he’s a celebrity and the right color. At least I know that I’m on the right side of history, the side that cares enough about issues to truly study our candidates.”

Continue reading

The Little State That Could… — July 17, 2014

The Little State That Could…

Originally blogged in 2012. I started to make a new blog concerning recent events in Israel, however, I then remembered that I had written this during the 2012 debacle. There are a few points that are specific to that particular year, but in general, this post is relevant and is exactly what I would say today. 
If only the Civil War was the only misconception that the left has had in the last day week month decade really, really long time…But alas, it is not.  

In a land far far away situated between Canada and Mexico, the people are split on their alliance, who they support in the war between Hamas and Israel (Trust me, it’s not over.) I have seen too many posts to respond to concerning Israel “stealing” land from the Palestinians. My twitter feed has exploded with derogatory comments, and that is why I decided to write this post.  

Although typing up a basic response (basic for me tends to be a book) and exercising my mad copy/paste skills in each post was incredibly tempting, I decided to write this blog post to address my beliefs and factual backing for what I feel is some of the greatest misconceptions concerning Israel out there today. 

“How would you feel if someone stole your land??? Those poor Palestinians!” 

My gut reaction to statements like the above is to respond to this with, “Really, you’re NOT going to side with God’s people?”. Bus alas, I have always felt that my moral beliefs should be understood by the atheists as well. Even though I feel strongly that a “moral law” is written on the hearts of men BY God, I try to approach my explanations in a way that can’t be construed as being “bible thumping.”

Now…We COULD go all the way back to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The Promised Land. The 40 years of wondering in the desert. The history of Jerusalem. The Establishment of the Jewish Monarchy. The Roman Rule, Arab Rule, Ottoman Rule, etc. But for the sake of our sanity, and a goal of keeping this a “blog post” and not a “book,” I’ll keep it short (er)…

Here is my somewhat sporadic, yet condensed, history rant: 

So let’s travel back in time to the 1920’s – 1960’s and deal with those land thieves once and for all. When Israel stole the land from the Palestinians British…Just kidding. They didn’t steal anything. BEFORE the State of Israel was declared, the land was territory of Britain. It became British territory through the Sykes-Picot Agreement (or Asia Minor). They called for it to be shared between the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians (Since they recognized both), actually the word “Palestine” was given by the Europeans to name the region (“region,” people, “region!”). The Jewish community, known at that time as the Jewish Palestinians, gave a thumbs up to the concept, the Palestinian Arabs gave a thumbs down. Why is it that we forget about British Imperialism after the whole fall of the Ottoman empire?

So, back to the middle of the 1920’s. The British divided the land, giving the Jews west of the Jordan river, and the Arab Palestinians what we now call Jordan. Then came the whole “We want ALL the land, lets push those Jews into the sea” idea. So, they started the war games trying to drive the Jews out, and they still haven’t ended, nor will they anytime soon. The Brits turned a blind eye to the chaos that they could no longer control, and the Jews decided that it was time to fight back and protect the land given to them.

Then the British turned the states back over to the UN (Adoption remorse?). BUT, upon receiving yet another offer to have both a Jewish Palestinian state AND an Arab Palestinian state the Arabs said, “no, we want all of the land that is both East & West of the Jordan river.” Too bad…so sad Well…isn’t this a pickle.

Since the Sinai Peninsula was traded to Egypt for peace, and Jordan was originally going to be within the Israeli borders, technically the most accurate way to describe the actions of that time period would be to say that ISRAEL is the one with whom had land “stolen” from them. There were NO Palestinian borders. None. Zip. Ninguno. Geen. It was a region. How do you steal land from the Arabs when land is GIVEN by the British to the Jews? Because they wanted it? Are we 5? It’s like when your Mom puts out a platter of cookies, just because you lick a cookie then put it back on the platter doesn’t mean the cookie is actually yours. It wasn’t their time to play “claim that territory,” because the British had already claimed it, and then GAVE it to whom they chose.

SO, throughout this time the Jews PURCHASED more land from the Palestinians, the Palestinians were removed from the land. No, not by the Israelis, but by the Arab countries that wanted to invade Israel. They said “flee so that we may bring our peaceful religion’s war machines into position!” Ok…maybe they didn’t use that exact verbiage, but you get the point.

Throughout all of the wars, including the one between 1948-49 the Jewish Palestinians ended with a slightly larger state than what the UN had proposed. BUT, by the time we hit the 1960’s the Arab Palestinians had control of 85% of the Palestine territory, compared to the 75% they had been given.

Bum bum bum…The Six Day War.

The Six Day War was for the exact same premise as all of the previous wars between the Arabs and the Israelis. The Arabs rejected, and STILL reject Israel. The Egyptians had used United Nations troops from the Sinai Peninsula to block shipping to Israel’s port of Eilat. This was an act of war, and the Arab nations have NEVER denied that it wants Israel OFF the map. They don’t want peace.

It’s simple: They don’t want Israel to exist.

During the Six Day War Israel fought Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia…etc (The Arab Republic) And they win. (Somebody had their spinach…and you know…GOD…) Jewish people had control of the Sinai Desert. If you haven’t seen a map…that’s a large chunk. Israel (being the last shred of good in the Middle East) told the ready to flee Palestinian Arabs to stay in hopes of educating and finally finding peace between the two nations of people. Then in the 1980’s Israel gave the Sinai Desert to Egypt in an act of peace.

But from the beginning of the wars, up through current day, the Arab Palestinians have had ONE goal:

“Our aim is the full restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people. In other words, we aim at the destruction of the State of Israel. The immediate aim: perfection of Arab military might. The national aim: the eradication of Israel.” – President Nasser of Egypt in 1965

“We will not accept any coexistence with Israel…Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel . The war with Israel is in effect since 1948.” – Nasser in 1967 

“This is our chance Arabs, to deal Israel a mortal blow of annihilation, to blot out its entire presence in our holy land” Cairo Radio

Oh, but they weren’t just filling their “burn book” with Israel…

“Millions of Arabs are … preparing to blow up all of America’s interests, all of America’s installations, and your entire existence, America.” Cairo Radio

So, you can be angry at America, and angry at the Brits, but the facts are, it was British territory, and it was GIVEN. Israelis are not thieves, in fact, they have given land to promote peace, and any of the land gained during the wars was because they WON the land during a war NOT started by them. But the problem isn’t the offers, the problem isn’t the lack of peace, and the problem isn’t Israel.

The problem is that the countries surrounding Israel want her gone.

The problem is that while Israel wants peace, Jihadist don’t know of such a thing as peace.

The problem is that while Israelis wants “coexistence,” terrorists want to drag their family members lifeless bodies through the streets.

During this time, Iraq proclaimed that “Israel was an error which must be rectified.” Palestinians stated that “it is either us or the Israelis,” and Syria declared that it was time to “explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland,”etc. So from THOSE quotes alone we can clearly see a reason for a bad case of sellers remorse on behalf of the Palestinians. So while the Palestinian militant movement of Hamas is dragging bodies through streets and committing war crimes both by aiming at civilian locations, and hiding behind their own civilians, you’ll have to excuse me while I look at you with puzzled amazement when you proclaim your support of Hamas…Or better yet, your condemnation of Israel.

Israel tries their hardest to avoid civilians. They were even warning them with phone calls, roof knocking, and even dropping leaflets over Gaza warning them to “avoid being present in the vicinity of Hamas operatives.” Of course there are civilian casualties of war…But one side is doing their best to avoid as many as possible, and the other is meticulously planning them out.

Egyptian President Morsi backed Hamas and stated that Israel needed to end the aggression. Mr. Morsi is a high-ranking member with the Muslim Brotherhood and has an open door policy with the White House, what we fail to see is that the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, and Hamas are basically sister terrorist organizations. They’ve all vocalized their deeply rooted hatred for Israel, including the Muslim Brotherhood…and yet our President supports them. Why haven’t we cut off economic funds???

Hamas is a progeny of the Muslim Brotherhood. When the Muslim Brotherhood says “jump”, Hamas says “how high?”. Of course Morsi had the power to create a “ceasefire,” he’s had it all along, and Israel has no urge to continue fighting. Hamas backs off, Israel backs off.

But hold off on your “peace celebrations.” For Israel hating Morsi to encourage a “ceasefire” tells us that deeper, more sinister plans against Israel are lying in anxious wait. We can’t possibly be ignorant enough to believe that he has had an instantaneous change of heart concerning Israel. The Morsi government has turned a blind eye towards the killing of Christians, and now are bringing in a new level of dictatorship. Egypt is about to get very bloody. So, right AFTER the “ceasefire” Morsi comes out with his sickle and hammer ideology…Sounds legit.

Islamic theocracies…They redefine the word “brutal”.

Back to the point…I ask that you put yourself in the shoes of Israel. Let’s say you purchase a house. While unpacking your dishes and settling in, suddenly a rock comes crashing through your window with a note:

“Dear Israel Jones Family,

We hate you and hope you die. We want to demolish your home, preferably with you in it, and build a pool, maybe even a mini bar with ackawi dip and smooth cardamom coffee equipped with straws long enough to accommodate our Burqa wearing women…You know…If we decide they can have coffee. So, we have weapons and will be violently attacking your home, and probably trying to vaporize your children.

Sincerely, All of your neighbors, Including the people who sold you your garage.”

Would you not defend yourself? Israel has been taking numerous attacks over the years, rockets, warnings and brutality. But when Israel defends itself we give a “stand down” order?

I support Israel. I support her because God told me to. I support her because it’s LOGICAL. I support her because she is the one shred of decency left in the Middle East. I’m ashamed that 51% of my nation turned their back on her by voting in a President that supports her enemies.

Alright, I’ll finally get to the end of this post. But just know that if you’re dealing with Hamas sympathizers, you are not alone. We live in an America where a dictator gets a majority vote, and the people support terrorists and brutality in the Middle East while preaching on “peace.” There is more of this to come. How do I know this? Because “God said so”…

MB

 

Bobbing For Scandals — June 25, 2014

Bobbing For Scandals

First off, I must apologize again for the amount of time between posts. So far it has been a crazy year, but I promise that I am getting back on track. 

So, on a scale from 1 to Black Friday in Bath & Body Works, how overwhelmed by all of the Obama scandals are you?

Seriously, I sat down and made a list of all the current topics I could blog about, and the list grew so long that my brain shut down. I found myself spacing out while staring sideways at my list, similar to how I speechlessly stared sideways when I encountered that lady in Walmart that asked me where the milk was while I was shopping on the complete opposite side of the store….in the paint aisle.

So, my friends, I’m going to blog about some of the topics on my list, but this blog post isn’t really about them; it’s about you.

*Pulls first topic out of the bucket labeled “Facepalm”*

Lois Lerner Emails:

My phone contacts all have the name of my actual contact, and also “& NSA” attached to them:

“Mom & NSA”

“Beth & NSA”

“Chris & NSA”

Etc….Get it? Ha ha ha. Ha.

At first it was just a joke, an ironic joke, but a joke nonetheless. The funny part about this “joke,” is that it was entirely possible. Why? Because our country is technologically savvy, to a fault. That’s why when I heard that Lois Lerner had 2 years’ worth of emails lost, I laughed. Then I laughed even more. Then I cried from laughing. Then I cried for the people that believed this unmitigated rubbish. Then I worried about the offspring of those who believed it, and the possibility that their parents were the type of individuals who thought that the milk was over by the paint. Then I started laughing again. This cycle continued for at least 4 hours, it was exhausting. So I laughed myself to sleep, then after my nap I proceeded to laugh again.

I’m not even going to explain WHY this made me laugh so hard. If you need an explanation, I just want to inform you of a useful fact: The milk is NOT by the paint in Walmart. I think Paul Ryan said it best, “This is unbelievable…Nobody believes you.” I don’t believe that ANYONE can be that simple minded. You know that the emails aren’t lost. I’m giving the human race the benefit of the doubt by assuming that everyone knows this is a lie, and that those that are saying it’s not a lie, are in fact lying themselves. Kind of like how I gave the lady in Walmart the benefit of the doubt, maybe she’s never been in my Walmart…or any other Walmart.

All in all, we should be deeply offended. They actually think we are that stupid. That says a lot.

*Sticks hand into the “Facepalm” bucket and pulls out another topic.*

Bergdahl Swap:

Is this in any way defensible, People? I love how all of the individuals that are free after this debacle, yet shouldn’t be, see America as the big bad bully of the world. They all feel that our Country needs to be taken down a notch. They all find our principles, Constitution, and way of business to be flawed. That includes the 5 terrorists released, you know, the people that want us dead, and Bergdahl.

Oh. And our President and all the manipulating, cheating, treasonous bureaucrats that supported him during this dangerous and illegal trade.

There’s no excuse. None. Zip. Nada. Nein. Nai. And for our friends who speak Swahili: “Hapana.”

We’ve reached that point in time when those we elect are giving more trust to deadly terrorists than they give us. No seriously, let that stew in your prefrontal cortex for a while.

*Hand dips back down in “Facepalm” bucket*

ISIS & Weapons of Mass Destruction:

So, ISIS stole the non-existent weapons that Saddam never had, because they never existed, because that was all just a Republican conspiracy theory. (Insert axis of evil joke here.)

Any questions?

Oh, and I know that right now you’re wondering why that all matters, thinking to yourself, “Let’s get to the important questions when it comes to Iraq…Like, are the tortured and beheaded civilians of Iraq fully educated on Climate Change?”…Have no fear, John Kerry and Bill Nye have all of those bases covered for you.

*In order to save time, Marybeth pulls out 4 topics from the “Facepalm” bucket*

Koch Brothers:

Can we please stop picking on innocent American citizens and the First Amendment? Do the American people realize that some of those we elected to represent us are now actively trying to silence us?

Dear Harry Reid, Stop. Just stop. You show more distain for the Koch brothers than you do for the recently released terrorists who prefer a death penalty that involves rape, torture, and beheading. Let’s treat the philanthropists just a bit better, eh?

SIDE NOTE: There’s a VERY thin line between politicians protecting you, and getting the chance to have them sic the Gestapo on you for a thought crime. Remember that very important detail when you don’t think that a Conservative blogger should be able to say that Obama is irresponsible.  

Redskins Logo:

Everyone is screaming about how we can’t blame Obama for what the Patent and Trademark Office did. Alright, I’ll go to the special land of Selective Verbiage with you. You’re right, Obama didn’t throw down his gauntlet and demand the change, but the government that he has empowered has figured out that they can weaponize government agencies, and that’s basically the same thing. Patent and Trademark Office, IRS, Department of Education, etc. are attacking the people of the United States because they hold different beliefs than the Left.

Sgt. Tahmooressi:

Bergdahl is home after betraying the United States, and it cost us a considerable amount of danger. An uncountable number of lives could potentially be lost because of this switch in the years to come. Yet, our government will sit silently while a dedicated American Sergeant is held captive in Mexico. Revolting.

VA

Wow. Just wow. THIS is what you get with socialized medicine. Period. We can do better, and there is SO much more to say on this topic, enough to get a blog post of its own, and it will. This is just proof that our government is violently out of control.

Maybe in the near future I’ll give detailed views on these subjects, as well as many others, but for now I just wanted to give an overview.

As for this being directed at you, it’s directed at you because the mid-term elections are coming up. I would say that they are even more important than the Presidential election. It is time for you to speak up, it is time for you to care, and it is time for you to find your voice before it is silenced. This isn’t about your wallet, this is about the fact that people are dying because of the policies that these politicians are pushing. It’s about them being too weak to even bring up the LONG OVERDUE idea of impeaching our President.

Show them that you are willing to do what is right for those you love, and for those who NEED you to be their voice.

Do something.  

–          MB

!!!!!BONUS ROUND!!!!!

*Pulls paper from the “Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Shouldn’t be President” bucket*

1975 Audio Recording:

We now have a tape of Hillary laughing about the 1975 case involving the rape of a child. Hillary also attacked the credibility of the 12 year-old rape victim, saying that the 6th grader fantasized about older men, and wanted the inappropriate relationship. So, in other words, the 12 year-old child, who probably still had dolls and read Nancy Drew, wanted the 41 year-old man to force himself on her in his car, parked on the side of the highway.

By the way…Feminists are defending Hillary.

I’m going to go ahead and black out for while… *blank stare*

Reason & Facts vs. Personal Attacks — May 28, 2014

Reason & Facts vs. Personal Attacks

I’m quite careful when labeling issues as “taboo,” I believe that we tend to label too many issues with this description in an attempt to “pick up the torch,” per se. It gives us a false sense of purpose, and instead of simply talking about the subject, or bringing awareness, we instead make it an uncomfortable topic when most of the time it wasn’t one to begin with.

I’m not insinuating that some subjects aren’t truly taboo, because clearly there are many. My point is to simply note that talking about certain subjects removes the taboo, labeling it “taboo” for some self-serving purpose, does not. It always boggles my mind to google and find thousands of different blog posts about one “taboo” subject. I have that special little, “I do not think that word means what you think it means” moment.

To my point – If there is a beloved female in the conservative movement right now, it is Dana Loesch. She is worshipped on twitter, and held in high regard in the majority of conservative circles. So in the beginning of last week I stifled my opinion for the most part, especially since I kept thinking to myself that speaking negatively against Dana is “taboo,” so “just don’t do it” flooded my mind. Then I found myself writing a letter to The Blaze, and in said letter I proclaimed the opposite of what I had said in my silence:

So while the crowd follows this type of vitriol with excited anticipation for the next “take down,” there are some of us who have never followed, tail wagging, behind the popular girl who purposefully hurts people to get a laugh or a pat on the back. I never have, and I won’t start now.

SO, here I am to put my money where my mouth is after calling out my own hypocrisy, even if no one was privy to its existence in this particular case.

As noted above, last week I sent a letter to The Blaze concerning The Dana Show, and while I won’t share the entire letter, I do plan on sharing bits of said letter throughout this blog piece.

As a Conservative, very little that the left does makes me cringe anymore. I’ve learned to accept the depravity that accompanies most of their ideologies, especially those that have an incredibly destitute view of human value. Don’t get me wrong, there are decent people on the left side of the aisle, but the policies themselves wreak of principles that embrace proclivities for the sheer sake of self satisfying goals.

That said, I find myself cringing quite often these days when reading the, almost villainous, replies from fellow Conservatives. So, this blog post is for those of us who wish to be more in this world than a cheap and forgettable witty comeback. So, pretty much everyone. If you don’t fall into that category, you probably shouldn’t be reading my blog.

I can be sarcastic, a lot, but I try to remain sarcastic towards the beliefs or stance of a person while making truth and honesty the forefront of my arguments, not their personhood, and I always keep it clean. Why? Because why shouldn’t I? Should I fight back with material that only serves to demonstrate a possible absence of substance? That’s exactly what the elitist “progressives” crave. They want us to get down into the mud and play their game, because then they’ll photograph us when we’re muddy and use them as a weapon against us; rightfully so, I might add. This doesn’t make me special, or superior, it simply makes me reasonable. Do I think things about some people that I shouldn’t? Of course, but like most people, I try to control myself.

So what happened to make me write a letter to The Blaze? A woman called Dana a “bitter hag.”

Call me cold hearted, this would not even budge my feelings enough to garner a reply. I wouldn’t be rendered speechless out of offense, I would be rendered speechless out of a need to conserve precious time that this particular comment would waste with an unwarranted reply. Yet this comment was used as the catalyst for a childish “yo momma” segment. “You’re gonna love this,” Dana declared before reading the “bitter hag” comment in her character voice of the day, to the sound of intimidating music.

Hmmmm…probably not, Dana.

As I mention in my letter, “When I think of the things that she has been called, or what I’ve been called, or pretty much anything else that any other conservative woman has been called, “bitter hag” is an incredible upgrade.” I stand by that statement, and my reasoning was clarified later on in the letter:

Have we crossed the isthmus? Are we no longer able to voice personal opinions without juvenile Mean Girl-esque attempts to personally attack someone? More importantly, did being called a “bitter hag” really offend Dana that deeply? Or was it a convenient way to get the “attaboy” accolades from the masses? If she was offended that deeply, I’m forced to reconsider my personal opinion that she is a strong conservative woman. If it was the latter, I’m forced to reconsider my opinion that she is a strong conservative voice of reason.”

Why was I so impassioned by this particular segment? After reading the comment, Dana proceeded to show a picture of this woman, then showcased a photo of this woman’s mother. She then proceeded to verbally assault this woman on her overbite, attacked her facial features, her couch, her hair, and also made fun of their looks in comparison to her family’s self-proclaimed superior looks. Oh, to be so blessed aesthetically. Somewhere within the diatribe there was even a z-snap, then it ended with a final jab that taught the woman a lesson about helping her frizzy hair to be tamed with a dime size amount of conditioner.

Too far, Friends. Too far.

My below reply to her may seem harsh, but her response to this woman was the quintessential villainous response from Conservatives that I’ve grown to fear:

“My elderly family members are, shockingly, not supermodel candidates. I’m guessing that this reality is shared by, well, everyone that doesn’t have a 50 year old supermodel Grandmother. Imagine that, people get old and unattractive, and if your daughter calls someone a “bitter hag,” your photo can be paraded and mocked on TV by a woman with an Ichthys tattooed on her wrist.”

Every person that she ever debates will probably have an elderly family member or an unattractive feature. Come on, it’s low hanging fruit. Female empowerment does not find its core in the arrogance of the popular girl, female empowerment is found in our ability to think rationally. If we can’t move above grade school tactics, we are just as immature as those who buy votes with “free” contraceptives and degrading “first time” commercials that are specifically targeting an audience that they assume is of lesser intelligence, i.e., women.

I disagreed with the hate mail portion of The Dana Show to begin with, but this was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Why, you might ask, was this so important to me? Important enough to create a letter? Because I know that Dana is capable of thought provoking points, she is talented in opening the eyes of those she debates with, and she is incredibly intelligent. All of those qualities are lost on the other side if this is how she plans to conduct her behavior. As I said in the letter, the hate mail segments just seemed to cross the line between wit and obnoxious to me, even though they did nothing to offend me.

If she read her hate mail with a Darth Vader mask I’d be a bit more amused…maybe. Probably not, but it’s a possibility.

I felt in a way that it was belittling to women. Is this how we see ourselves? As sniveling beings in need of pointless vent sessions using various accents for theatrics? Maybe I’m on my own little island when it comes to that view point. Or, maybe I realize that if I wasn’t grounded in my opinions, and I was looking for a side that was speaking the truth, I would pass up the theatrics and look for the adults with facts.

So now the question is posed to us: What do we want to be known for when it comes to our political opinions? For our, questionable at best, wit when it comes to producing nicknames, e.g., “Obummer,” and “Moochelle,” or our ability to comprehend the Labor Force Participation data? For our solid z-snap, or our dedication to fighting for the voiceless? Whether we can weaken our opponents into a crying hot mess over their hair texture, or whether we can present them with facts that leave them unable to intelligently defend their position?

I know what I’ve chosen.

Sarcasm and wit lighten the mood, or get your point across in a more direct manner, when used in the right context. But when they are used to attack a person extraneously, as she has done sporadically in the past, they only serve to demonize the views of conservative women everywhere. We should find our views to be substantial and without need for petty attacks that speak to the supposed ignorance they accuse us of having. Not because we need them to think we have a factual viewpoint, but because we do have a factual viewpoint. We don’t need the petty attacks, because we have the truth. Personal attacks are nothing but unmitigated nonsense when either side participates in their furtherance, and beyond that, they are harmful to conservative women who stand on reasoning and facts.

Alright. Now I feel better. Time for coffee.

–          Mb

Image

It’s time to stop vilifying our military… — April 7, 2014

It’s time to stop vilifying our military…

I’ve always hated the labels that redirect the responsibility of misdeeds from individual accountability to life circumstance. Sure we all go through struggles, but why does society categorize those who struggle as individuals who somehow deserve a permission slip? 

She had a child out of wedlock at 16 – Yeah, but she has Daddy issues….

He’s a drug addict – Yeah, but he didn’t have many friends…

She sleeps around – Yeah, but she’s a child of divorce…

He’s a rapist – Yeah, but he was sexually abused…

I’ve known many wonderful and strong people who have overcome much, they know the statistics and refuse to be a part of the social expectations. They may struggle emotionally, but they’re determined not to let their suffering victimize someone else. I’ve also known many who let the social expectations dictate their life, it’s like having lifetime subscriptions to “but” and “because” for them. Those who are responsible shouldn’t feel like they have to prove their responsibility to the world because society tells them that their circumstances put them in the negative to begin with. Everyone is responsible for their own life. Which brings me to the meat of this blog post…

PTSD.

First and foremost, my heart goes out to those in Fort Hood. I’m heartbroken for the families that lost a loved one, those who are recovering in the hospital, as well as all of the families that experienced the terror of those life altering moments. Last Wednesday, we all watched the horror unfold like an all too common rerun of a horrific movie, the sudden stab of its reality reoccurring in our minds for days. 

We are human, when such acts of horror invade our world like an unexpected enemy, our first response is always to question why. Closure becomes the holy grail of healing. We want to know what would cause someone to do such a thing, we want to know how we can prevent such acts from occurring. In some small way, leaving the act so fully unjustifiable seems to prove the existence of unmitigated evil in its darkest form. If we can just get a grasp on to the underlying situation we’ll feel a little safer, right? How do you stop someone from wanting to hurt innocent people? Could this particular attack be stopped? How can we make sure that this doesn’t happen again? How can we keep a wife from having to pick out a casket because a madman snapped?

Answer: We can’t. Period. 

The sooner we accept this scary reality, the sooner we can make improvements that increase our ability to protect ourselves and our families.

Upon turning on the news this weekend I heard the term “PTSD” used roughly 10 times in 30 minutes by 3 different stations. I believe that doing so can be both unintentionally harmful, and sometimes meticulously orchestrated, dependent upon the deliverer of said news reports. 

In an effort to answer the “why”, we’ve placed millions of people who suffer from PTSD in a category labeled “Unstable”. Millions of abuse victims, dedicated soldiers, missionaries, car wreck survivors, etc. suffer from PTSD every day, and they aren’t dangerous or unstable. They’re victims of circumstance, but they know they are responsible for their own actions.

PTSD is an anxiety disorder that can leave you in fear for your own life, as well as the life of others. It can cause you to feel like you aren’t in control of your surroundings, and oftentimes normal everyday activities serve as a trigger for your memory, causing you to relive the specific events. It leaves some unable to speak about the events, it can cause them to avoid situations that they fear, which can become all consuming. Hypersensitivity, as well as addiction, are also possible. It’s very common, and those who suffer are far from alone.

There are also those who suffer from brain damage and severe mental disorders, and I believe that we can do more to help them and prevent tragedies by doing so. But the point of this post is to make it clear that using PTSD to justify the slaughter of innocent individuals is not only ignorant, it’s irresponsible, and it vilifies those who come home from war. It encourages them not to seek help.

They’re heroes overseas, yet suddenly untrustworthy with a weapon on U.S. soil. We’ll send them to fight for our rights, but then question their own rights when they simply ask for help. In blaming PTSD, we also tell them that they’re not responsible for their actions, and we fail the very people that fight for us. Many feel out of control, and so we reiterate to them that they are out of control by placing their decision making process fully in the hands of an anxiety disorder.

So, to make this perfectly clear:

PTSD did not go on a shooting spree. Ivan Lopez went on a shooting spree.

A gun did not go on a shooting spree. Ivan Lopez went on a shooting spree.

Millions of people suffering from PTSD daily did not go on a shooting spree, nor will they. Ivan Lopez went on a shooting spree.

Which brings me to my next issue:

Danny Ferguson was engaged to be married. He’d just returned from Afghanistan, and he sacrificed himself while trying to save others. Danny obeyed the law and wasn’t armed on base.

Carlos Lazaney-Rodriguez dedicated 20 years of his life to serving his country, in seven months he planned to retire. Carlos obeyed the law and wasn’t armed on base.

Timothy Owens was a counselor and had also done time in Iraq. He planned to make the military his career. Timothy obeyed the law and wasn’t armed on base.

Ivan Lopez did not obey the law, and he took their lives before taking his own.

A common misconception that spread like a vicious wildfire after this recent attack is that Fort Hood, a military base, should be well equipped to protect itself. They feed the idea that we must control guns, that we need to control those with PTSD, that we need to have more restrictions, etc. Yet they fail to mention that our Military bases are GUN FREE ZONES.Fort Hood is the liberal utopia! Guns must be registered, no carrying permitted, only police are armed, etc… Yet what was the first response when these policies failed?

We need more control.”

When are people going to realize that violence will always happen, and that the only response from leftist politicians will be to tighten the belt even more? I believe that even they know it won’t work. It’s the same across the U.S., they know the policies don’t work, we have the proof. Feeding the fear of guns is simply a glowing opportunity for Democrats to have more state control. Period. When it fails, they don’t care, they just push for increased control. The accompanying body count of defenseless victims is simply collateral damage for the common good.

My Dad served in the Army for 30 years. He was trusted in life or death situations, highly trained, level headed, etc… I hope I’m not the only one disturbed by the insanity that while he was willing to take a bullet for our country, our country turned around and put him in danger when he came back home. This fact is infuriating to me, and quite hard to stomach.

Is it just a lack of common sense? It’s simple: Those who plan to break the law and murder someone are not going to mind breaking the law to gain the weapon to do so. That’s right, out of the entire military, including millions of those that suffer with PTSD, .00007% went on a shooting spree this year, so that somehow justifies keeping the rest of our military in danger? Go back and recount those zeros so that we can bask in the unrivaled ignorance of gun control.

I often ask why law makers and leftists fight to unarm our military. The only answer I have is one that scares me: They are either dangerously ignorant, and are therefore incompetent to run a country, OR,  seeing men and women in body bags is not a cost they’re not willing to pay for their propaganda and control.

I see people fighting all the time on behalf of military benefits, and I’m not asking you to stop…But I find it equally important, if not more so, for us to fight for their right to protect themselves. Our soldiers fight for the freedoms outlined in the Constitution, then come home and get gunned down because they’re not allowed to have those same rights, then survivors get labeled as ticking time bombs because they have PTSD.

Come on, America…We can do better.

 

Equality or Depravity? — January 26, 2013

Equality or Depravity?

A few months ago I wrote a blog post concerning the equality of women and the dramatic kick off the pedestal the feminist movement has brought upon women. Since I’m no stranger to controversial topics, I’ve decided to expand on a recently escalated arm of this topic. It’s been a while since our last post, why not dive into the controversial deep end and get this year started off right.

I love a good debate, in the last few days I’ve had some interesting debates both on Twitter and Facebook concerning women in combat. I have found that the majority of the left love the G.I. Jane mentality of women on the frontlines. But I have also found some on the right that feel women are just as capable, that a volunteer army provides the gift of choice for the men who would not choose to fight beside a woman. Also, that a woman is given the same choice and willingly puts herself in danger.

Is it sexist to say that you would not want to stand behind a woman with a gun?

Is it feminist to say that you are just as capable of fighting with the guys?

Is it heroic for a woman to join in the battle?

Here goes!

First I want to bring up a few twitter posts from our ladies embarrassing serving our nation:

Nancy Pelosi: “Lifting the ban on combat is a significant step forward for equality. Women will now be able to reach the highest ranks in the military.”

Debbie Wasserman Schultz: ““Valor knows no gender.” Another historic step in the march toward full equality.”

In my post entitled “Women, a National Treasure,” I talk about my issue with so called “equality”…I referenced a quote from Ravi Zacharias talking about how God commanded men to love women as He loves the church, Ravi goes on to say that in doing so, God called for men to love women as He has loved humanity.

So to my point: When the feminists preach on equality, they are not talking about pulling you up from the lowly levels of the supposed barefoot and pregnant doormat, they are talking about pulling you down from the pedestals of treasured entities worthy of the utmost respect and protection. Debbie and Nancy should just come out with a blanket statement of “Thank goodness we’ve gained ground in our fight to stop men from holding us in such high regard that they won’t let us die in the barbaric conditions of battle.”

What torture would a female POW face that a male POW wouldn’t? Do you honestly think that a demented, vicious and brutal enemy would treat you both the same? Would a woman’s “benefits” not bring on a prolonged level of torture to a morally depraved regime that already finds women to be below the level of dogs? What honorable man would feel heroic allowing a woman into situations where she will possibly face those conditions, regardless of her willingness or her capabilities with a gun?

The social changes deemed as “appropriate” have only served to lower our level of human dignity. We assign a level of deserved degradation to countries that have the audacity and cowardice to place their armed women and children as shields…To treat them as a disposable entity unworthy of the utmost protection is seen as one of the lowest levels of masculinity known to man. My confusion then begins when our military places women on the frontlines, why does our position change to labeling this as a step towards equality?

Equality, thy name is Hypocrite.

Let’s give another example of this: Say your daughter is getting ready to walk to work at 1am, she will be walking in dead of night with the possibility of shady characters lurking in dark shadows looking for opportunities. (This is where most Fathers would figure out a safer option…but let’s roll with this…) Would you REALLY feel like a man sending your wife to walk your daughter to work? I. Don’t. Think. So. If you didn’t deem yourself a coward, you would surely be a delusional coward.

Is chivalry completely dead?

I am happy to report that no, it is not. I posed the question on twitter and received DM’s as well as replies that men feel as though this is an easy answer. The majority of the replies came from men who were familiar with combat, they were veterans, men currently serving, etc…Some were non military men that just knew what concerns they would have if on the battlefield with a woman. It was heartwarming. All gave a “nay,” women do not belong in combat. I did not receive ONE response on twitter from men (other than from liberals) saying that women should be placed in combat. While some women would yell “SEXIST,” I offer my sincerest thank you for seeing women as too precious to put through the hell that some of them have faced, or the hell they know exists. This feeds into my next position on why women being in combat is such a poor idea.

Since chivalry is NOT dead, honorable and brave men automatically have a sense of responsibility toward women. It’s not a prejudice. So what OTHER dangers are there?

SIDE NOTE: Women have only 60 percent of the physical strength of men, on average. Honestly, I am one of the women that are probably WELL below that, I don’t mind the prejudice.

If men have this automatic sense of protection and responsibility toward women, why do we think that adding another distraction to the battlefield is a good idea? How many lives will be lost because the men are trying to fight AND protect the women? How many men and women will face emotional damage beyond the normal amount battle already creates? For a man to see a woman, someone he is wired to protect, in hygienically depraved circumstances and emotionally damaging situations comes with its consequences.

This is not equality. This is not bravery. This is not biblical. This is not safe.

I’ve heard many stories, many testimonies from women who have served tours. I’m proud of our military women, but as a woman, if I wanted to throw myself on the front lines for my country in an act of bravery and protection of my family, I would have to stop and realize that my choices could be putting others in danger, and could also lower the morale of men who have so bravely sacrificed so much for me already. The strengths of a woman are not measured by the vast amount of things they can do that are “better or equal to a man.” The strengths of a man are not measured by the amount of people he can kill or the awards decorating his chest. The measure of who we are is judged by our motives … If your motives stem from a dedication to your family and a love for the US, that’s heroic…If that’s the case, ladies, THINK of the implications that your presence will have on your fellow soldiers and their ability to fight and protect your family.

Is it so bad to accept our limitations and flourish in our abilities? Call me old fashioned, but I find that the roles of women have strayed so far away from any position of being deemed “treasured.” I won’t go into detail on that since I already did in my prior post. There are differences between men and women (besides the obvious), emotionally, physically, and mentally. You may not like the truth, but the truth cares not if you like it, nor believe it. In Israel the women fight, not because the government wishes that upon women, but because they are constantly under threat or attack and NEED the help. BUT, the women are treated VERY different from the men. They serve half as long, and they are automatically exempt if they marry or have children.

The natural reactions and inherent responsibilities of men with a conscience will always be there. It is society that teaches the man that his natural response is selfish and sexist. It is society that teaches the woman that raising a family is not beautiful or heroic. It is society that tells a woman that being treasured is degrading, that being protected is oppressive, that being cherished is inequality.

It is evil that teaches a man to abandon his natural God given responsibility to protect and love women. It is evil that teaches a man to stand behind her while she is shattered with bullets. THAT is why good men will always feel the need to protect women, even if the women are willingly putting themselves in danger. That is why brave battlefield ready women will cost lives. The best way to make the monster of chivalry decimation grow, is to feed it. Put women in vulnerable positions, in torturous conditions, in the hands of barbaric men…Then teach men to treat them as they would fellow male soldiers, that is giving the “monster” a buffet.

Lt. Commander Kenneth Carkhuff was relieved of his duties after being promoted for his “unlimited potential,” He was “destined for command and beyond”. Why was such a decorated and honorable man relieved of his duties? He was relieved of his duties because he expressed to his commanders that his Faith was colliding with his orders to lead women into combat. So instead of doing what other countries have done after the morale of soldiers left them compromised once women were introduced to combat, which is remove women from combat, we in America have chosen to force men to abandon their decency, or their careers. Young men everywhere want to be heroes, and like Lt. Commander Carkhuff, they also would take a bullet before letting a woman come into danger, or avoid the career all together.

When will we stop letting feminist desensitize our men, and start demanding the respect that is God given. Jesus went out of his way; he did things deemed as shameful, brave, and startling just to show the woman at the well how precious she was to Him. He commanded men to love women as He has loved humanity. I don’t know about you, but that kind of love seems beyond equal, beyond beautiful, and beyond fair to me.

MB

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 62 other followers

Build a website with WordPress.com
%d bloggers like this: