The Unspoken "Holy Grail" of Liberalism

Equality...

The outward "Holy Grail" of liberalism. On its face, and without the surrounding context that's needed, equality seems like a worthy goal.

Seriously, who wouldn't want a world where literally nobody would want for anything? Or have a serious reason to complain about anything?

Like I said - it seems like a worthy goal. Something for which everyone should strive to achieve. Or so liberals assume...

The problem is that - and I know that this will be a shock to any liberals who read this - NO ONE PERSON IS ACTUALLY "EQUAL" TO ANY OTHER.

Every person on this planet is different - we all want different things out of life. We have different interests, different likes, needs, desires.

Some people are smarter than everyone else.

Somewhere on this planet, there's a person that some people will think is more attractive than you (unless you're Lena Dunham - then everyone is more attractive than you).

Some people are funnier than others. Some have better eyesight, sense of smell, more sensitive touch, more empathetic.

Some understand things and people better than you and I.

Some people just have better luck.

We look different, speak differently, act differently.

Some are more ambitious than others - the drive to be the BEST at whatever their chosen activity fuels them to make the strides necessary to do that. Whether they actually ACHIEVE that goal is immaterial - what matters is the attempt.

Some are more content with staying "middle of the road." They don't like to call too much attention to themselves - be it good or bad attention - and that's perfectly fine for them.

Nobody I have ever met is bound and determined to be the absolute WORST at whatever they set out to do. I don't think that's even a part of human nature.

Liberals - all of this is OK. It's actually good to be different than everyone around you. It should be encouraged.

I have often said that the Constitution is our most important founding document. It is the foundation of our entire society, our national identity. Its uniqueness has ensured our freedoms for two-plus centuries. No other nation's founding documents specifically tell the government what it can and cannot do to its citizens. None that I am aware of, at least.

Lately, however, I've been thinking that our most important founding document is the Declaration of Independence - particularly the phrase "all men are created equal." Liberals - take note that it says we are created equal, not that we are equal. We're not equal, nor have we ever been. For all the differences I've listed above, there are countless other examples.

There is an old adage that runs something like "Only two things in life are certain - death and taxes." Again liberals, take note of the rather glaring absence of the word "equality."
What the Founders knew, and what liberals have forgotten (or most likely ignore), is that it was never meant for our outcomes to be equal. It was our opportunity to pursue those outcomes that was to be equal.

In the United States, everyone starts on as level a playing field as is humanly possible. Your accident of birth doesn't determine how far you can go in your life. Your ability to use the opportunities inherent in being an American to your advantage determine your outcome. Yes, there's always a certain amount of luck involved, but the lion's share is up to YOU.

A better way of saying it is - The equality is in the opportunity to chase that which you most desire. Catching what you desire most is entirely up to you. ~ Hunter

Liberalism On Display: Baltimore

When did we, as a nation, tolerate our elected officials giving their tacit, if not overt, stamp of approval on rioting and destruction of both public and private property, the assaulting of civilians and police, and a general disregard for the safety of our fellow citizens?

Baltimore's mayor, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, through her actions and decisions  - more properly, her lack of action and poor decisions and her own words - has virtually guaranteed the destruction of large swaths of the city she swore an oath to protect.

These are "protests" no longer. These are riots - with the wanton and meaningless chaos and destruction that that word implies. What's going on in Baltimore should disgust anyone with a brain.

The worst part about it - and the lesson that was apparently not learned from Ferguson - is that WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT HAPPENED YET. Nobody knows how Freddie Gray received the spinal injuries that led to his death. If the police were responsible - and I sincerely hope they weren't - then all involved need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Period.

Legitimate protesting is freedom of speech. No one would dispute that. Rioting, however, is not. Not even under the loosest possible interpretation of the 1st amendment.

The mayor of Baltimore needs to be removed from office and prosecuted for failing to uphold the law or provide the protection Baltimore residents deserve - and the sooner, the better.

By the way, Mayor Rawlings-Blake actually denied giving looters permission to destroy by claiming the press "mischaracterized" her words.

Because apparently video cameras and other recording devices don't exist in her version of reality. ~ Hunter

My Vote? RINO's Need Not Apply

I've never made a secret of my disdain for polls and pollsters. I truly believe that if they're not outright useless, they're harmful, particularly to political thinking.

While watching Fox and Friends this morning, pollster Frank Luntz was interviewed about the Republican field being in New Hampshire. Luntz has a focus group - one of my least favorite phrases - of likely Republican primary voters.

Luntz says that, according to his group, no one candidate has risen to the top as an odds-on favorite for the Republican nomination. That's not really a surprise given how early in the race it is.

Then he says his focus group believes that electability is more important than ideology.

Yes, you read that correctly.

I know that we're talking about New Hampshire here, but really?! Not worrying about ideology is what led to King DingleBarry's coronation.... Twice!!!

We need a conservative, plain and simple - a true conservative.

There is an ENTIRE GENERATION of voters who don't even know what a true conservative is, let alone what a true conservative looks and sounds like. We need someone who can articulate why conservatism is best for all.

Romney, McCain - not conservatives. Jeb Bush - not a conservative. I would even hesitate to call Marco Rubio or Rand Paul conservatives, although they're much, much closer than Romney and McCain have ever been.

There's a time and place for voting for the lesser of two evils. The primaries aren't that time and place. After the last two presidential elections, I'm not sure even the general election is the place and time anymore.

2016 could possibly be the most important election, not just in our lifetimes, but in the history of the nation. The next president could either be the final nail in the coffin of freedom - or the beginning of the restoration of that freedom.

Time is running out for us. The window to save what we all love is closing. We need this one, and I believe the only way we can win is with a conservative - unafraid, unapologetic, uncomplicated and, most importantly - unabashed. ~ Hunter

Guest Post: A Lie Named Hillary

I found this in the comments on a FreedomWorks Facebook post about Hillary running for president. I love this so much that I had to share it. ~ Hunter

A Lie Named Hillary by Scott Davis

I don’t detest Hillary Clinton because she is a woman. I oppose her because she cannot tell the truth to save her life. Any public servant who has the gall to issue a list of terms the press cannot utter, as if disposing the corpse of free will, is helplessly deluded and a petulant child. Sorry, Hillary, but no one owes you anything; especially the nation you proclaim to serve with nothing but the benevolence of blind ambition. If your candidacy cannot survive without the aid of deception, division, and the fabricated catcalls of “sexism” to demonize your critics, then please tell us why America needs you? Better yet, please explain how you’re even worthy of a job? A leader doesn’t need pollsters, a panel of advisors, two news conferences and a room full of media drones just to announce whether or not she used an unauthorized server to conduct official government business and therefore deleted emails in an attempt to avoid prosecution. A leader would never break the law in the first place. And a leader doesn’t shout “what does it matter” when four lives are lost in the wake of her unmitigated failure. Any self-respecting adult with an ounce of integrity would simply admit the truth. Excuse me, any self-aware child who knows the difference between right and wrong, life and death.

If I’m hiring someone to run my business, placing my future in foreign hands, I don’t care whether you’re a Democrat or Republican, a man or woman, white or black. I want the most qualified candidate whose character speaks for itself and whose ideals can stand on the merits of their own wisdom. That’s common sense. Are you going to have the audacity to tell me what I can and can’t ask; what verbiage is acceptable? If your resume and vision are truly best for the entire nation, not just one party, gender or race, either should be able to withstand the most blistering questions and exhaustive scrutiny. In fact, you should welcome any and all discourse to discredit your detractors and display your competence. A leader unites, empowers and inspires by example, not by excuses or endless blame. Tell me the national debt is a record 18 trillion and that Barack Obama has raised it more than the first 42 presidents combined. Admit that 93 million Americans are out of the workforce, nearly 50 million are on public assistance, and that the economic recovery is a sham. Admonish Iran as a destabilizing force of Islamic radicalism that must never be mentioned in the same sentence as “nuclear power". Recognize the reality every civilized nation has immigration laws and that American sovereignty, the safety and security of her people, supersedes any political ploy to stuff the ballot box beneath the hollow cries of racism.

Yes, just like generations of legal immigrants before your candidacy, respect is given when trust is earned. If you are incapable of acknowledging simple, documented facts - solely because it’s easier to hide behind a propaganda platform that cajoles and incites an expendable public - you’re not interested in solving anything, let alone serving the American people or any notion of truth. You’re the cancer killing the country I love. You’re the lie my forefathers never told.

We Won This Round...

Just over $842,000 was raised in a GoFundMe campaign for Memories Pizza in Indiana.

The campaign was started to help the owners offset their losses after a local reporterette asked a HYPOTHETICAL question about catering a gay wedding and the owners started getting death threats, as well as at least one threat of arson and the pizzeria was forced to shut down, at least temporarily. All this from the ever-tolerant Left.

The answer to the hypothetical question was a resounding NO, they would not cater a gay wedding based on their religious beliefs. As the pizzeria has many prominent displays of Christianity in the store, the answer shouldn't have come as a surprise to anyone.

They never said they didn't welcome or serve gay people in the actual restaurant. In fact, the woman went out of her way to say that they are indeed welcome to eat at the place.

With all the hubbub surrounding Indiana's now-gutted version of the R.F.R.A., and the cries of bigotry aimed at Christians who choose to stand on their religious principles, what's being lost is one very simple truth: there is a world of difference between providing a couple of slices of pizza (or a regular cake, or a photograph) to a gay person who walks into your establishment and contracting to cater, or bake for, or photograph a gay wedding. The former is mostly random, uncontrollable; the latter is not.

To accept and fulfil a contract to provide services for a wedding requires forethought and planning, and not something one does DURING THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS. The other IS the normal course of business.

The Declaration of Independence, the document that paved the way for the creation of the greatest nation in history clearly states that man is endowed by our Creator with "certain unalienable rights." The Bill of Rights enumerates those rights.

The very first part of the very first amendment speaks of freedom of religion and the freedom to practice said religion. By definition, part of that religious exercise is the right to NOT participate in something - a gay wedding, for example - that is believed to be against the religion being exercised.

For the government to step in and FORCE a baker, photographer, or a caterer to provide their services for an event that's against the provider's religious beliefs violates the right to freely exercise their religion. What providing that service amounts to a tacit endorsement of that event.

The Left, while clamoring for supposed "equal rights," willfully and deliberately uses misdirection and misinformation to bully people into compliance with their worldview. An example of this is the number of people branding those who donated to the GoFundMe campaign "bigots" and "homophobes," completely overlooking the gay men and women WHO DONATED TO THE CAUSE.

Why is the Left so surprised when people have opinions differing from their collective opinion? Are we all supposed to walk in lockstep with one another? Are we not all capable of independent thought? Of making our own decisions based upon our own beliefs?

This utopia, this "perfect society" the Left seeks - where everyone thinks the same thoughts, eats the same food, drives the same cars - will NEVER exist. There are too many NATURAL variations in and amongst mankind for that to be possible, let alone man's natural inclination to be free, to decide for ourselves what's best for us.

There is definitely a growing support for gay marriage in this country, right or wrong. The Left, however, mistakes SUPPORT of gay marriage for ACTIVE PARTICIPATION in gay marriage. Forcing a business owner into providing services IS forcing an active participation.

And that's just plain wrong. ~ Hunter

Dear Israel and the American People

Dear Israel,

We the People of the United States of America do solemnly apologize for the actions of our so-called "leaders" with regard to this "framework" that might lead to a possibility of exploring the potential for maybe thinking about daydreaming about getting a nuclear deal done with Iran (after they have a weapon, naturally).

We're sorry you were sold out by King DingleBarry, but to be fair, he's been selling out the American people for 6 years now, so we're glad to finally have the company.

We the People still overwhelmingly support our only true ally in the Middle East, even if our media (read: demoKKKrat propaganda department) tries to make it seem otherwise. We are still proud still stand with you.

Signed with much regret,

We the People

*      *      *

To the American people (the ones who voted for the Petulant Pretender),

Way to go, low-information morons...

You elected a guy who is, in accordance with his only core belief, dedicated to the destruction of the United States as a world power. And you did it TWICE. The presidency isn't one of those things where you say, "I'll try anything twice, just to make sure I really didn't like it the 1st time."

Congratulations are in order for electing the one guy who could simultaneously spend more than all forty-three of his predecessors combined while making America the laughingstock of our enemies (and an embarrassment to our allies).

I've wondered what "leading from behind" really, truly meant since the day His Royal Lowness first uttered those words.

Now I know, and I tremble for my children's future - and the future of the United States of America...

No really, thanks a lot...

We are so screwed. ~ Hunter

 

Establishment And Free Exercise Thereof: What The First Amendment REALLY Is

I've never understood the mindset of people who claim that this isn't a Christian nation, or the religion was never meant to be part of government.

 

The "freedom of religion" part of the First Amendment is, in no way, a prohibition on religion in government. It is, however, a restriction on government in religion.

 

That restriction, known as the "establishment clause," means that the federal government cannot endorse a particular religion or sect over any other, nor can it require the people to worship a certain God, or require one to worship any God. A further prohibition on the establishment of its own religion, i.e., the Church of England, is intertwined with that.

 

The "free exercise" clause means exactly what it says - one is free to exercise one's religion freely, wherever and whenever one wants, provided that it does not endanger one's fellow citizens' lives. You can't hold Mass in the center lane of I-95, for example.

Separation of Church and State is an utter fallacy. It exists nowhere in our founding documents. The phrase itself is actually misquoted from a private letter Thomas Jefferson sent to the Danbury Baptist ministers responding to their fears that the U.S. government was about to choose an official religion. The actual phrase reads - "separation between Church and State."

 

That word "between" brings a whole new meaning to it, doesn't it?

 

What Jefferson meant - coincidentally, the over- and mis-used quote from the Treaty of Tripoli about the U.S. government not being founded on the Christian religion also means the same thing - that the Church (not religion) wasn't the government, as it was in so much of Europe at that time, therefore the government had no business or inclination to establish an official religion.

 

Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black coined the phrase "separation of Church and State," taking liberties with the meaning of the Constitution, despite having a reputation of being a literalist. As a member of the KKK (reputedly "just" to get votes), Black was very accustomed to taking liberties with the Constitution, despite his vote against segregation in Brown v. Board of Education. For the record, Black was a veritable mass of contradictions.

 

To claim that religion and religious principles were never meant to be part of government is folly. Jefferson himself, a supposed atheist, attended Church services held in the Capitol Building, clearly disagreed with that sentiment.

 

Perhaps it's time to return to the vision of the Founders and Framers and stop thinking we know better what they meant than they did when they founded this nation and wrote the documents we're SUPPOSED to live by. ~ Hunter