Think about this

One of the twenty democrats on stage during the DNC debates, or one of the uninvited, will eventually be the democrat nominee. Any one of the the twenty debaters would be a disaster for this Republic as well as the others. More may well jump in.

Yep, I watched the debates, both of them. Now many, if not all, will be out doing damage control either for the answers they gave or for past actions, inaction or statements made. Some will even claim that they were misquoted or taken out of context, even though what they said was what they said. Some will claim they are or have been the victim of some sort of ism.

Each and everyone of them think and believe that more government control will cure all the ills in this country, on this the republicans are no different.

On healthcare most of them were trying to sell(pitch)Medicare for all, the basis for which is that the healthcare system is broken and one claimed the deductible was too high. Was not the Affordable Healthcare Act(ACA),aka Obamacare, supposed to fix the broken healthcare system? Could it be that they knew it would not, just a stepping stone to get to Medicare for all(single-payer)? The dream of every liberal politician.

I do feel they are at least a little dishonest in their Medicare for all plan, anybody over 65 will tell you Medicare A covers doctor visits, Medicare B covers hospital stays but only 80% of the total the remainder is covered by supplemental insurance(insurance you must purchase on your own)commonly called Medicare part C, then there is Medicare part D which covers prescription drugs. So just what are they really offering? By the way anybody that has Medicare part B will tell you that part B has a monthly premium. As to part D, all medications are not free sometimes there is a co-pay and some medications are not covered, which means those drugs are paid for “out-of-pocket”.

More than a few raised their hand when asked if they would end private insurance. If private insurance was eliminated how would a person pay the remaining 20%?

Is their plan to cover medical costs, all medical costs, from cradle to grave? If that is the plan how could it possibly be paid for? There is no way taxes could be increased enough to pay the bill.

There was only one person in the first debate that brought up this little tidbit. Hospitals could and would possibly go out of business if they were only reimbursed at Medicare rates. I wonder how many doctors would continue in practice if they were only reimbursed at Medicare rates.

Then again that could be the plan. Drive the hospitals and doctors out of business. Imagine living in a country where the hospitals are all government owned and operated, and all doctors are government employees.

By the way this Medicare for all, single payer or universal healthcare(or what ever it morphs into)will also cover those here illegally.

On education almost all have a plan to give away something. Many want to either forgive student loans or at a minimum help pay down the debt. As to forgiving the debt owed by university graduates, just how could that debt be forgiven? It is money owed, it must be repaid. The plan is to tax Wall Street to come up with the funding for this scheme. There was only one during the first debate that said it would not be right to have those who never attended college to pay off the loans of those who did.

There is also the issue of a free college education, even to four year university. Could a university remain open if all students could attend free? They can not be in earnest if they think this could all be paid for by taxing the rich, Wall Street and Corporations. Could a government owned and operated college and university system with all professors and staff being government employees be in our future? The government already controls the primary and secondary school system as it is. So why not expand the government education(indoctrination)system?

There was one with a plan for universal pre-k. The lady can not be in earnest. She has a plan for universal pre-k while supporting abortion. She supports the killing, in the womb, of those who would benefit from her proposal.

On gun control. They all have some sort of scheme to further encroach on the rights of law-abiding citizens.

This one is just stupid. One has a plan for a anyone who owns a firearm to obtain a gun license. They would have to apply for a firearm license at a local office that would be widely available in urban and rural areas. I have no idea which Constitution this man has read but according to the one I have we already have a firearm license, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment to that Constitution.

Read this carefully. “Keep your pistols, keep your rifles, keep your shotguns, but we can take the most dangerous weapons from the most dangerous people”. I would like to point out that this man is not earnest, how can he say on one hand keep your rifles when he plans to ban and confiscate a class of rifle. Remember back when someone said if you like your plan you can keep your plan? What is he saying? Does he consider the law-abiding American to be dangerous just because they choose to possess a certain type of rifle? Who or what are we a danger to?

That comes to us courtesy of the same Representative who got in an exchange concerning a mandatory buy-back plan(gun confiscation scheme)and starting a civil war and saying that it would be a short war the government has nukes. The same one that wants to ban and buy back every “assault weapon” in the United States and prosecute everyone who fails to comply. He seems to think that most all Americans would comply with this scheme.

Here is another one for you to read, and do read it carefully. “As somebody who trained on weapons of war, I can tell you that there are weapons that have absolutely no place in American cities or neighborhoods in peacetime. Ever. What is he saying? The words “in peacetime” caught my attention.

One claimed she liked the Representative’s plan but said congress was reluctant to act and she would give them 100 days to pull these plans into a bill she could sign. Should they fail at this she would take executive action.

One said “The gun manufacturers are the enemy”. The enemy of who or what? These are the same gun manufacturers that produce the firearms carried by his security detail.

I do wish that one, just one, of these moderators would have the “brass” to ask the following at one of these debates. By a show of hand, how many of you are for gun control. Every hand would go up. Now by a show of hand, how many of you would give your armed security? Do you think any hands would go up?

I am quite sure that security at the debates was many layers thick and armed to the teeth.

As I said above one of this cast of many is going to be the eventual nominee for the DNC. There are some in this cast of many that knew from the outset they did not stand a snowball’s chance in Hades of ever becoming the nominee. They are just there to gain enough support to influence the remainder of the field, pushing them farther left. As one after another bails out those remaining will be seeking their endorsement. I do wonder if the nominee has already been selected.

They spent considerable time bashing the usual big money donors. How do they expect to fund their campaigns without big money donors? Perhaps a wink and a nod, watch what we do not what we say.

If the eventual nominee wins the presidential election the people who were promised all this free stuff are going to demand all of that free stuff. In fact they will expect all of the promises made to be promises kept.

A few more items before I close.

They spoke of the corruption in D.C. Considering how long some have been there they are part of the problem, yet they try to convince the voters they can be the solution.

The subject of police involved shootings came up none of them could state the obvious, which is Stop doing stupid stuff that causes the police to shoot you.

The subject of incarceration came up and again none of them could state the obvious, which is Stop doing stupid stuff that gets your butt sent to prison.

It is not the fault of this nation that people trying to enter this country illegally die in the process. It could be the fault of the liberals for encouraging them to come here by offering freebies upon arrival.

Sacred cows of the left

It would appear that the left has more concern for their “sacred cows” than for this Republic. The left’s sacred cows are based on opinion rather than fact.

I may as well dispense with this now. The left will claim that the right has a sacred cow as well, the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment is based on fact not opinion, that fact is spelled out in the Constitution.

There is one more thing to dispense with. Opinions change, Facts do not. It is a fact that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, the rising and setting of the sun is based on fact not opinion.

Speaking of opinions. I for one am just about tired of opinion polls, sick and tired of hearing what percentage of Americans support or believe in whatever. Opinions change based on new information or when hidden facts come to light. Pollsters are paid, their polls are skewered to get the answer desired. If you ask 100 gun haters about guns you will get a typical gun hater response. Polls are also wrong, every poll taken with the exception of one had HRC handily winning the last presidential election.

When I hear talking-heads on the right spouting the results of the latest poll I just shake my head. When I hear a leftist talking-head spouting the results of the latest poll, well that is to be expected. Both of them, left and right, only spout the poll numbers that further promotes what they are trying to “sell”.

It is sad indeed that this Republic appears to no longer lives under “the Rule of Law” and lives under the “Rule of Opinion”.

The left is in a tizzy over the newest Supreme Court nominee, some of their present “sacred cows” may be dispensed with and some of their future “sacred cows” may never come to light. So let us examine some of those “sacred cows”, and while I am at that I will point out the dangers of being governed(ruled)by opinion.

Abortion. Abortion(the legalized murder of children in the womb)comes to this Republic courtesy of the opinion of the majority of 9 Supreme Court Justices. The left is scared that the newest nominee mat take this “sacred cow” to slaughter rather than continuing to slaughter(legalized murder)children in the womb.

Congress passed no law legalizing the murder of children in the womb and certainly no president signed it into law. It is very doubtful that legalized murder would have ever became law if not for opinion.

I find it a little more than ironic that those who support abortion and perform abortions were themselves in fact born. They art the product of live birth, but in true leftist fashion they seek to deny or provide an avenue for the denial of others what they themselves have, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

The left uses the equal protections clause when it suits their needs or agenda. They claim that it is the woman’s body and therefore her choice, but the unborn has no choice. The unborn is in essence deprived of life and liberty without due process of Law.

Same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage comes to us courtesy of the opinion of the majority of the Supreme Court Justices.

Congress passed no law legalizing same-sex marriage and again no president signed it into law. There is no address of marriage in the entire Constitution, yet same-sex marriage is now a constitutional right. The left used the equal protections clause.

The only historical document that addresses marriage is the Holy Bible, described by God as being between a man and a woman.

Those that profess to support same-sex marriages are the product of marriage as described by God.

I could go on with examples of opinion trumping law but you get the picture.

As said above the left is in a tizzy over the Supreme Court nominee over the way he may vote on issues that effect their “sacred cows”. The fact is no one knows exactly how he will render his opinion. The left can not take that risk, they want a Justice who will hold the same opinion as the leftists and render his opinions as a leftist. They fear a Constitutionalist.

DEO VINDICE.

Tugging at heartstrings

Again the left uses a tried and true scheme to influence public opinion, using emotion over logic. The latest outrage from the left comes courtesy of illegal immigration. It seems that children are separated, or were being, from their parents(mothers mainly)at the southern border. This happens when and because the “parents” cross the border illegally with children.

They even stoop to using a false(manufactured)picture on the cover of a liberal leftist “rag”, the one showing a crying child looking up at the President while the President looks down on the crying child. Again it is all about the children.

The left is once again “worried” about the children. They claim it is inhumane to separate children from their mothers. They claim that common sense gun reforms(restrictions placed on law-abiding citizens)will protect the children from murderers(non-law-abiding people). They care not about children whether inside or outside of the womb, what they do care about is their socialist/communist leftist agenda. They care not about children, private property rights or borders, if they did they would not be socialist/communist leftists.

The “children” crossing the southern border face unlimited/untold dangers(exposure to harsh elements, rape, human trafficking and such). If the leftists really cared about those “children” they would demand that a border wall be constructed. The children would not be placed in danger while making that long arduous journey, there would be no way in except through authorized entry points.

Look at some of the benefits at a wall along the southern border. It would cut down on illegal drugs entering this country. It would cut down on undesirables(gang members and other criminals)entering this country. It would benefit and protect the children they would face less dangers.

Entering/attempting to enter this country is an unlawful act, those who commit unlawful acts are usually detained. The illegals crossing the border illegally are placed in detention centers while they wait for disposition. Children are separated from adults at hose centers as a protection for the child. If one crosses illegally with a minor, the minor is separated from the adult as a precaution while things get sorted out, if the child is the offspring of the adult the separation is only temporary.

They even try tugging at the heartstrings of pro-life conservatives, they “worry” that the illegals that just happen to be pregnant are getting the pre-natal care they so desperately need. They have a “concern” for the unborn and the mother all the sudden. Since when did the leftists care one iota about the unborn.

Show that you really care about children. Build the wall. Protect the children, do not place expectant mothers in harm’s way. You have to do this for the children, As you say if it saves even one life it is worth it.

Prove you care. You do care don’t you? Come on leftists do it for the children you claim to want to protect.

DEO VINDICE

The liberals in a nut shell

They are for the death penalty as long as the condemned is still in the womb. Other wise they are totally against putting a person to death. Kind of seems backwards to me, willing to condemn the innocent but protecting the life of the guilty.

They fight tooth and nail against voter ID laws, claiming it imposes undue hardships on the poor. I guess that the poor can not afford a picture ID. Yet they have never proposed legislation that would provide a photo ID at taxpayer expense for the poorest. I can not understand why they never propose such legislation especially when they believe that government is always the solution. I also wonder why the republicans never propose this.

They are for religious expression as long as Christianity is not the religion being expressed. They are for free speech as long as everyone is saying what they are saying or what they want to hear. If it goes against what they say, think or believe then they call it hate speech. They demand to be heard while demanding others be silent. They don’t really have to worry about the press, the press is in their corner. They would rather have the First Amendment repealed than have to contend with differing view points.

They support the Second Amendment as it pertains to hunting, except for those that have come right and said the Second Amendment should be repealed. Problem with that cupcake is that the Second Amendment was not written to allow hunting. You can read the Second Amendment forwards, backwards and even upside down and you will not find the words hunting, target practice or sports shooting. The Second Amendment was written for a specific purpose and reason.

They only want to ban scary looking rifles and high-capacity magazines. They even come up with new words, their new one is military grade. The old one was assault weapon. They say no one should be allowed to have military grade weapons but the military and law-enforcement. I believe the correct term would be Mil-Spec(Military Specification). But you could not call the AR-15 a Mil-Spec weapon could you? The AR-15 is not made to Military Specifications, it is a modern sporting rifle made for civilian use.

But then that is what you do you use words, more accurately use a play on words. You cant really come out and say you are pro-abortion, can you? That would equate to being pro-death. So you use the phrase pro-choice, by using the word choice it gives the impression that what happens was the choice of all. The truth of the matter is that the one directly effected by the “choice” had no “choice” in the matter. So lets look at some of your other plays on words.

When it comes to gun-control you use phrases like;
End gun-violence. Why do you never speak of ending violence? The U.K. banned guns and that did not end or stop crimes committed with a firearm, they still happen. They may have lees crimes committed with a firearm than here in the U.S., but for two straight months this year(Feb and Mar)the murder rate in London surpassed the murder rate in N.Y. City. The residents of London now have to contend with knife-crimes and acid-crimes(violent acts committed with a knife or acid). So the U.K. stopped the mass shootings, sort of, and now they face the possibility of mass stabbings and acid attacks. Now London lawmakers are having to come up with laws to control knives and acid. They now have to end knife-violence and acid-violence. Our northern neighbors had an act of violence that involved a man driving a van on a sidewalk and mowing down pedestrians, 10 dead and 15 injured. He used neither a gun, knife or acid his weapon of choice was a motor vehicle. A person intent on killing or maiming will use whatever tool is available. Neither the gun, the knife, the acid nor the motor vehicle is violent on its own in each case it takes a human to use those items in a violent manner. For you it is not about ending violence, it is about ending guns in the hands of the citizens(law-abiding citizens). If your gun-control measures worked the most violent cities in this land would be the safest, but it is the exact opposite.

We have to do it for the children. You really expect me to believe that you care about children when far more are murdered by abortion. Enough said on this one.

If it saves just one life it is worth it. My question is worth what? You and I both know that there is no way to prove that even one life was saved. This simply can not be measured. Besides some in your camp(cult)have come out and said that no legislation could have prevented______(fill in the blank).

And then there is everyone’s favorite. We just did not go far enough.

Now that the gun-control cult has been outed, your far enough in that matter is the repeal of the Second Amendment and banning all firearms from the public. You are okay with the military and law-enforcement having all of the guns, well all of them but what the criminals have. The criminals will still have guns. Maybe you should look back in history, not that far back either, and see what happens to the civilian population when they are deprived of the tools to defend themselves. There was a reason that the Founders and Framers included a Bill of Rights, in particular the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Read about Boston, Lexington Green and Concord. Read the Declaration of Independence. Read the Constitution, there was a reason the Founders and Framers did not want a full-time standing army, if they did not want a full-time army they certainly had no intention of giving them all of the guns. Since law-enforcement is part of the government local, state and federal they certainly never meant for government to have all of the guns either. They also never meant for the people to be deprived of arms, if they had they would have said so.

Speaking of the Constitution you use it to your advantage when it suits your agenda. Take the Electoral College for instance, when your guy wins the Electoral vote you shout to the world that the system works, you do not mention the popular vote unless you by chance get both. When your guy, or in this case gal, loses the Electoral vote but wins the popular vote you scream that the election was illegitimate the Electoral College is outdated and does not represent America. When it comes to the Second Amendment you say the Founding Fathers never intended for us to have _____(fill in the blank). You use the equal protection clause for every group but Christians and gun owners.

They want every person in this country to vote in the elections regardless of citizenship. I guess not enough legal citizens supported your candidate, you need some illegal support. Win any way you can, right? You really are an obstructionist when it comes to securing the border. Would you act the same if those coming here illegally were apt to vote republican? While on this subject, you are having a “kitten” over the citizenship question being talked about when the new census comes out. You want to count heads not citizens. Why? Seats in the house are based on population, the number of citizens not heads. You could stand to lose some House seats, reports have it that there has been an exodus of citizens from your liberal leftist states. Not to mention the money that flows to states is also based on population. If it was the way it was you would have to send money to D.C. based on the census, you would kick the illegals out so fast and hard they would bounce three times before coming to a rest on the other side of the border and build a wall a hundred feet tall and ten feet thick with a minefield to keep them out.

What is going to happen on your march to go far enough? This question sets up another post.

DEO VINDICE

The hypocrisy of the left

It seems that the “spokes mouth” for infringing on the Constitutional Rights of others has his panties in a wad over his Constitutional rights be infringed. The little fellow wants his rights protected. He seems to think that the requirement imposed to carry only clear back-packs(book bags)violates his First Amendment Rights as well as his right to privacy. I thought the “march for our lives” was about making a safer environment for students. Does he not understand that the requirement to have see-thru bags increases his safety, thus increasing his security. By making just that one little sacrifice of his rights to better his chances of security would be worth it, would it not. I mean if it saves only one life, it would be worth it. After all I am sure that no further restrictions will be placed on them, the students I mean and their possessions. The ones who made the decision to increase safety by requiring clear back-packs(book bags)would never make further intrusions like creating a maximum size limits or conducting random searches. They will most likely be satisfied with just the clear bag requirement, they wont do anything else and wont want anything else. Good grief what a hypocrite.

But then again the leftists excel at hypocrisy. The students should take a closer look at those adults who have offered all of this support to their effort, misguided as it is.

The politicians for instance, they come out after every tragedy and shout that more must be done to save the lives of the children, are in fact the same ones who support abortion. That’s right, they are for killing children as long as it is in the womb, by the millions. Would more gun control have saved the first life that was cut short by abortion. But even the pro-choice supporters, who are not supportive of choice they are instead supporters of abortion, are hypocrites of the worst type. Each is the product of a mother that choose life, life for them. It is the pro-life supporters that are attempting to save those millions of lives. I say attempting because their attempts are thwarted by the pro-abortion activists and judicial system.

The Hollywood(Hollyweird)types for instance they, the vast majority of them, have made their millions producing, directing or acting in movies that promote violence and most of them kill more people in the course of one movie that die in the mass-shootings they claim to be opposed too. If they really were in support of your march they would swear off making violent movies. But if they did they would not have made their millions and been able to give you just a pittance. And by the way just how many of them have an armed security detail, for their safety and protection. But just who is it that they need protection from. You their fans or just in case of one deranged fan, or is it both? Do they care about your safety or your money. By the way why do you go to see those violence filled movies anyway? Oh, and the music industry types. Kind of think they too just might have an armed security detail, you know for security and protection.

Your big money supporters they, the vast majority of them, have armed security details. They are not against guns at all they just want to control who has guns. Who is it that they need protection from? By the way most of them give considerable political campaign contributions to the pro-abortion candidates. If they really cared about the safety and security of children they would with hold those contributions.

You bitch and moan about the NRA and politicians who accept money and support from the NRA, while you remain silent about the politicians who accept money and support from the pro-abortion providers and supporters. You say the NRA and those supported by the NRA have blood on their hands, while ignoring the ones whose hands are truly bloody. The NRA itself has not taken the first life, pro-abortion has taken lives by the millions. Seems a bit hypocritical.

Your march(rally)and the associated protests were, in my opinion, a bit more than disingenuous. What you held was a gun control event. There have been proposals made that would enhance safety and security for schools, but you don’t like these proposals. You and you supporters proposed only gun-control. But let me point this out. None of you are against guns, you only want to have guns in the hands of a select few. Ask yourselves this, if your money people had to forfeit their armed security would they continue this rhetoric? I submit they would not. They do not personally provide for their security and protection, they outsource.

You have no idea of what spews forth from you mouth. You claim to be the school shooting generation, the generation that must endure active shooter drills. You want your school day to be free of distractions, hazards and interruptions. And to this you say “No more”, well good for you. However you are not the only generation that has had to endure distractions, hazards and interruptions during your school day.

Personal story segment. When I was in school right here in sunny Florida we never had to endure active shooter drills or worry about someone shooting up our school and killing classmates. We did however have to endure Civil Defense drills and all else that came with the Cold-War. We had to know what to do if the Soviets were to launch an ICBM. You should have been here during the times of the Cuban missile crisis. Imagine that, the Soviets were placing nuclear missile in Cuba, extremely short flight time. We were taught to dive under our desks if we were in class and the drill occurred. If on the playground we had to dive in low spots. Remember to close your eyes, don’t look directly at the flash. If you did see the flash count off the seconds to judge the distance. Remember that there would be a back-blast. Fall-out shelters were everywhere in town. Some more affluent families had their own constructed. When ever you were out you would look around for the symbol that identified the shelter, and know where every shelter was that you could get to, just in case. That was a lot for a kid to have to endure and still get an education, we managed.

You did learn about the Cuban missile crisis and the Cold-War in your American history classes didn’t you? Did you learn about Civil Defense? You know of “safe spaces”, but do you know of fall-out shelters?

I am going to interpret your way of thinking for just a moment. You obviously think that the whole ordeal of Civil Defense drills could have been avoided if America would have just destroyed all of its nuclear weapons. That would leave the Soviets with no one to launch nuclear weapons against because no one could launch one at them. There would be peace and security with no threat of a nuclear war.

Another personal story segment. I wrote a post recently concerning the fact that most of the boys in school carried a pocket knife. There was no way of knowing who had one and who did not, hell some of the girls probably had one as well. Yet we managed not to cut or stab each other. Mostly because we had no desire to cause that sort of harm to one another, that and we exercised self-control. We fought after school, a good old-fashioned fist fight and on the less dramatic occasions it was settled with a good old-fashioned arm wrestling contest, but never with knives. In hindsight there could have been another reason or two we never pulled a knife on each other. (1)The other guy might have one and(2)it might be bigger. Just those facts may have prevented some stupid acts. One acts stupid the other responds in kind, an understanding even if unspoken.

Back to the Soviets and nuclear weapons. First there was something called MAD(mutually assured destruction)if one nation were to launch nuclear weapons the other would respond in kind and possibly launch even more. You shoot we shoot back. Both would be destroyed. It was an understanding. Each knew the other would retaliate and keep doing so until all was destroyed. There have been talks to limit the size of the nuclear arsenal. Neither the US or Russia is willing to totally disarm, limit the number but never disarm. Why? If one or the other were to disarm the other would have total control and could do as it wished, the other would be powerless to stop aggression. MAD has prevented all out nuclear war and that idea still works today. Think about it, would you like to live in a world where only one person or country had the ultimate power to do as they wished? If the one with nuclear weapons decided to use them, with what could you deter them? More importantly how could or would you respond?

The turd that decided to come into your school had the advantage. First, having attended that school he “knew the lay of the land”. He knew when and how he could get in. He did not have to wonder if he could get in, he knew he could and he knew when. He knew the classroom layout. He, from what I understand, knew the SRO. He knew the schedule. Second, he knew there was no counter to his threat. He knew there would be no such thing as MAD. There is a reason that mass shootings never happen in “cop-shops”.

So I ask is the problem guns or the absence of guns?

There sure was a lot of security(guns)at your rally. Did you feel safe or unsafe? None of you looked the least bit uncomfortable. You did clean up behind yourselves didn’t you?

There have been other options brought forward to counter the school shootings. More armed security, more law enforcement, training and arming teachers and other school employees. But none of you have expressed any interest in those options. Why? It goes against your agenda of gun control. Which is the agenda to disarm the law-abiding public and leave firearms in the hands of a select few, the police and the military. Right? Wrong. There will be exceptions, there will always be an exception to the rule. Like I before E except after C.

Back to the first paragraph. You demand that your rights not be violated while demanding the rights of others be infringed. You cupcake are a hypocrite.

You claim that you should be able to carry a backpack(book bag)in the color of your choice, free speech. What would be your reaction is a student were to come to class sporting an NRA book bag or t-shirt? You support the First Amendment(free speech)when the person has the same view that you have. I could swear I heard someone at the town hall you all had where someone yelled “Burn her” when a spokeswoman for the NRA was speaking. You support the Second Amendment but only if the police or military are armed.

You might want to check your history about what happens when only the police and military have the guns, all of the guns.

As I recall, when I did stop by to check on your rally a couple of students made mention of being in a Holocaust history class when the shooting began. So I have to ask, were the victims armed or had they been disarmed?

DEO VINDICE

What? You expected something else

Some of act like you are surprised that your Facebook data was and is being used by research firms. Really, how much security did you expect? After all who was it that told them you were on your way to take a “dump”? You or them? Now you are mad at Facebook. Who forced you to set up the account and constantly update your status? You or them? Did you fill out all the information when you opened your account? Or did you just fill out the blocks with an asterisk(*), you know required fields? And the photos, please, if you must post “selfies” clean your mirror.

Speaking of mirrors, look in one and tell me what you see. Better yet do it this way. First affix the blame for your Facebook data being “out there”. Blame either Facebook or Yourself. Second look in the mirror. What do you see? If you blamed Facebook, you should be seeing the reflection of a Leftist Liberal Socialist Progressive. If you blamed yourself, you should be seeing the reflection of a Conservative.

Facebook only put the product out for you to use or not. It was your choice to have a Facebook account or not. Facebook is not to blame you are. But go ahead and take your anger out on Facebook. Frankly, this is the action of a socialist democrat. Blaming everything but the “root cause”. HRC has been all over this planet giving speeches and having a “good old-fashioned pity party” about losing the election. She lost, but has she yet to blame herself for losing? Everything and everybody else but never herself. Come to think of it has any politician ever really blamed themselves for losing an election, I really mean blame themselves? I do not mean the lack of “fire in their belly”, a total “copout”, an excuse.

The folks at Facebook should not get to worked-up over this “indiscretion”. The American people have a way of forgetting when they were wronged and who wronged them. Was not all that long ago there were some videos that came out with an abortion provider selling “baby body parts”. Man, the right sure got worked over that little “indiscretion”, hell, even congress threaten to defund them. I wonder if they got any part of that 1.3 trillion dollar pork package? I mean hell it was even more recent when the right were swearing off football, never to watch a game again because some knucklehead took a knee during the National Anthem. It seems that they got over that as well. The folks will get over the “indiscretion” at Facebook as well, after all there will surely be another “shiny object” to look at. If no other shiny object appears a good old-fashioned heartfelt apology usually does the trick, if all else fails somebody has to resign.

I very seriously doubt that anybody will be talking about the indiscretion at Facebook or the company that benefited after tomorrow. A new shiny object is about to appear that will cause all the past shiny objects to “pale in comparison”. The Facebook indiscretion will be forgiven, for tomorrow millions will put their anger aside and turn to social media.

Think about all of the other “social media” accounts you have. How much information did you voluntarily give them? Who has access to that data? Who has control of deciding who has access to the information? You did read the privacy policy and the terms of service, didn’t you?

DEO VINDICE

Recipe for disaster

This new push for gun control has disaster written all over it. The public stunts are not helping matters in the least.

So far we have had a man make a public statement by cutting his personal rifle into three pieces. Using the hash tag one less. Now mind you that neither him nor his rifle had any part of the shooting in Parkland, Fl. The rifle in question is his personal property and what he did to it is his business. All he has done is to make a public spectacle of himself. Some people will do anything for attention, we call them attention whores. He could have done what he did in private, if the act made him feel better about himself, but no he had to make a spectacle.

A list of Florida lawmakers was published who had received campaign donations from the NRA. Republican lawmakers, of course. Now I am not necessarily against revealing what politicians or candidates receive political donations and who or what made the donation. As you can guess the list was on republicans, not a democrat in the lot. Now I don’t know if any democrats receive political donations from the NRA or not. But this release is purely agenda driven, the agenda of the left. I do not recall any such release of politicians or candidates when the sale of baby body parts came out sometime back. There was no such list released of democrats who had received political campaign donations from the providers of abortion, there may have been some republicans on that list as well. I also did not see a list of politicians or candidates who received donations from Big Pharma, the ones who profit mightily by manufacture and sale of prescription drugs.

The Mayor Pro Tem of Dallas, Texas don’t want the NRA to come to town for their annual convention. The convention is planned for May but he wants it moved to another city. He wants to put the citizens first, and finds that hosting the convention at this time to be inappropriate. I will now use a line from the story that the man in question used, and ask the good citizens of Dallas, how did this man become an official? He asserted that the NRA “needs to step up to the plate” by establishing better gun laws.(Now this man either misspoke or does not understand who it is that makes laws. The NRA cant establish better gun laws, because the NRA does not have the Constitutional authority to make any laws, none whatsoever.)He then said that while he is a “believer” in the second amendment, “we should not allow people to possess assault rifles and weapons”. If we the people should not be allowed to possess assault rifles and weapons just what part of the Second Amendment is he a “believer” in? God help Texas. The same article on Bing.com news went on to give a total of how much money was given to support President Trump and how much money was spent in opposition to HRC. It also named the top 5 senators and the top 5 congressmen with the most contributions from the NRA.

A Hollywood type has announced he will make a $500,000 donation to help offset the expense of the March for Our Lives event in D.C. and march with the kids. He could have sent an anonymous donation to help offset the costs. He could have also just showed up and walked with kids. But no, he had to make a public announcement. Another attention whore, back in the news and in the spotlight. I am quite sure that many more will follow suit, each with their own announcement. Will they be doing it for the kids or for their own personal aggrandizement? I am quite sure also that some music people will show up as well. Thing is that most Hollywood types have made a real good living making violent movies and the music types have made a good living promoting a culture of disrespect and violence. One a side note, I just wonder how many kids that will be participating in the protests and marches went to see the newest and latest violent Hollywood production over the weekend. How many more will go see it between now and the planned events. Reports are that the movie has made a lot of money.

Protests and marches and counter-protests and counter marches there is bound to be some intermingling. There are some that are counting on such interactions. There may even be some arranging such an interaction. Wall to wall coverage is guaranteed, given that there is and was ample notification.

As brought up in the last post the left has done an apparently splendid job of creating a new generation that is almost totally leftist. The education(indoctrination)system is left of center, the MSM is left of center, some are extremely left of center. The kids in the public(government)school system have been exposed to the leftist mantra since pre-school. The government is the cure-all. Soon some of them will enter the world of politics. What will be on their agenda?

Most everyone says something has to be done. There is no one saying do nothing an just let it run its course.

As of now there are two prevailing paths and two sides. One side proposes to train and arm teachers and staff to provide safety for the kids in school. This has somewhat limited traction, limited in the sense that the left is totally opposed to this path. The other side believes that more gun control laws is the answer. The legal and lawful gun owners are against further restrictions.

The school shooting in Parkland, Florida may prove to be “the straw that broke the camels back” when it comes to gun rights and gun control. It appears that a line has been drawn, sides will be chosen. I don’t think there will be any fence sitters on this issue.

This will depend on how determined the students and their supporters are. A lot will depend on the longevity and intensity of the protests and marches. There is also the wild-card chance of violence breaking out. There is an election coming up in November. Most high school students are ineligible to vote, but their parents vote, if they are eligible. It is with little wonder why the left is willing to let anybody vote. It also depends on how much sway the activist students, their supporters and their parents have on the middle of the road republican politicians.

We are about to go through interesting times my friend.

Maybe there is a solution where both sides of this issue get what they want, a fresh idea so to speak. I have an idea that might just fit the bill, revealed in the next post.

DEO VINDICE
God Bless the State of Florida and her citizens.