Losing Our Posterity

Some percentage of people may have had an idealistic childhood and memories of it. There are others today who might think many people are romancing their childhoods too much. There is plenty of nostalgia around to lend credibility to the “golden days of yesteryear” concept. There’s also reason to think some people resent that.

As this debate goes back and forth, some also worry what the future will bring for our posterity? If you witnessed a decline to those good bygone days, you are not alone.

But liberals or progressives generally do not like us having a rose-colored view of the past. No, they lecture us about “moving forward.” In fact, they go out of their way to paint the past as the bad old days. Ripping out statues or old traditions are symptoms of their disdain. Now we even have politicians saying America was never that great.

So why bother stating all this? Because of the current debacle in Washington. We are very concerned about the security of our border, and illegal migration in particular. There sure is a split in left vs right over this. We hear anecdotes from the left romancing “historical immigration” as a sacred altar. Odd for people that look at America as mostly bad in the past to sing praises on immigration. That’s another matter.

The theories and skepticism about the impacts of this “illegal immigration” – invasion — continues on both sides. Why does it seem one side is in favor of it, embracing open borders, while the other side sees plenty of harm in the policies? That is another good question. I’d like to stay with their positions for a moment.

The progressive left wants this flow of undocumented people to continue. They don’t seem too concerned about the ballooning numbers either, or chain migration policies. None of those negatives seem to matter. Wearing blinders, they only want to see positives.

We know elections and politics are a big factor in their borderless rationale. And that brings us to the census question of citizenship the Left has itself in knots about. If illegals can’t vote in federal elections, legally, yet, then why are Leftinistas so adamant about not counting their non-citizen status? The higher the population in an area, the more representatives it can get. There’s one goal of the left laid bare.

But I suggest illegal immigration in huge numbers is a destabilizing force. Who would want that? Again, in my opinion, I’d say the left realizes that too. However, one of their goals could be to destabilize the country. Could the left want to destabilize the South especially? That would be in keeping with their vendetta of animosity against the South. It would be payback for a lot of reasons. But it also works politically to destabilize the South, by dividing people. Ever think about that?

Slowly they are trying to destroy any “myth” — as they call it — of the good old days. This destabilization and population change puts distance between that past and today onward. Thus, why they are not concerned about the huge numbers in the invasion. They like the consequences. That in turn would effect our posterity going forward. It also helps kill off any legacy of the South. I’ll take my theory over the law of unintended consequences.

Right Ring | Bullright

War Of Words

Don’t you laugh at how the left plays with words? They are pretty good at it. They use women’s healthcare to refer to abortion. They call it choice and “reproductive justice.”

When have you heard of a child that was a product of the reproductive justice program?

But occasionally in their rush to get their propaganda out of their mouths, they slip and inadvertently expose the truth. Unbeknownst to them most of the time.

Take the latest laws passed to preserve and protect human life. You know, in Georgia and Alabama. Now one in Missouri too. The left is outraged. But they weren’t disgusted by the late-term, infanticide pushing. pro=abortion bills. Those got kudos.

So activists go out to the media and complain, armed with the talking point that this law will disproportionately hurt women of color the most. Whatever could that mean? That was the main pro-abortion agenda.

If that is the case, does that mean the Left fully supports abortion particularly for women of color? Let them pitch a fit about those words. Go ahead.

I thought of a better way we could say it on the right :
This should not be partisan. It is a pro-life bill — designed to preserve and protect life — that will save many lives, especially for women of color. Is that a partisan problem?

Right Ring | Bullright

Have you no decency left?

Sorry, I had to ask. That question should not have to come up. And there is no easy way to ask it. Everyone must now know what NY’s legislature and Gov Cuomo passed into law.

Let not the sacred stand in their way.

Looking at what NY did for abortion should have broken any outrage meter still remaining in this country. But even that, as hard as it is to believe, is not even registering on the MSM dashboard. It’s not a blip on their radar screen. Well, full swat raids on Roger Stone don’t even raise leftists’ eyebrows.

Folks, this no longer is that slippery slope we all feared for years. it is a full scale avalanche. But what exactly did they do you ask? Well, basically they legitimized and legalized what Kermit Gosnell was doing, and went to prison for. They wrote infanticide into a bill.

The New York Assembly voted Tuesday night to pass a landmark bill to expand abortion rights in the state, about 90 minutes after the bill cleared the Democratic-controlled Senate by a vote of 38-24.

The Reproductive Health Act moved to the desk of Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who immediately signed the bill into law Tuesday night. – Syracuse.com

They timed it on the Roe V. Wade decision anniversary. Building evil upon evil.

But let’s dispense with the usual BS about it. Snopes already has a fact check piece claiming it is not what it appears to be and what we say. Supposedly it just protects the health of the mother, they claim. Come on, because it is dressed up under some guise of a healthcare right does not change what it actually does. Legalizes late term abortion and infanticide.

So infanticide, or whatever name you want to give this, was passed by a Democrat majority in the state senate and gleefully signed into law immediately. That’s right, I said gleefully. Instead of sneers and hisses, with moral outrage, it is actually being celebrated.

Cuomo announced it under the banner of “Reproductive Justice” with “no time to wait.”

That’s right, at one time people would instinctively run to try to save lives, but in this case Democrats scrambled to legalize killing lives. This is not a culture war, this is annihilation of culture. Of life itself in the most vulnerable form. Is even life not sacred now? Even if you don’t believe life begins at conception, which science seems to confirm, then you must accept that life begins at some other point. But by any measure, this exceeds that and then some. This is killing human beings and no one can or should deny it. Justice?

Never mind the worry about what Russia did, what is happening in the Middle East, North Korea, or Venezuela; look instead at what a state in this country is doing. Then they celebrate over it and dance in the streets. Is this America or is someone fooling us?

The very same people lecture us on the Statue of Liberty caption for immigration. New version: “Give me….your huddled masses yearning to breathe free” and we’ll kill them.

How long will a nation that cannot protect its most vulnerable last? Here is where I take issue with some popular notions. Many people complain how bad things are that hardly anything surprises them anymore. Very true. I see it a little differently. Sure, culturally things are bad. But, despite all the evil going on for all to see, I believe there is a huge dam holding back a tidal wave of evil not yet seen or calculated. There are now some fractures in that dam, and structural fissures are mounting.

So while we all complain about the bad and evil we see, there is a greater threat looming over us worse than we even imagined. Dare our opponents or critics on the other side, politically, complain about climate change and destruction of our environment on the horizon, while this type of thing passes as an accomplishment to cheers.

There are evils ahead on the heels of this we cannot fathom. It is the way evil works. It is difficult to even talk about or write, much less conceive it. And then doing it in the name of some good or noble things is just an added bonus. Pretty soon we may dispense with that notion entirely. Why invent a clever name for it? People at some point may just demand evil in its plain, raw form. Who cares what anyone thinks; it is what they want.

Then, to hell with excuses or arguments to assuage, just do it because. So it is nice that while leftists lecture us on humanitarian wrongs and rights, the same people could come to a moment when they can drop all that moral posturing – or otherwise. Who needs pretense and a premise? Not them. Until now, the need for illogical arguments to convince us was all that stood in their way. But what is the point if that is no longer a problem?

And when things we have been worried about and warning of for decades start to happen with more regular frequency, at a faster pace than even we could have predicted, will the people stand for it? It turns out that does not matter if there is no longer much opposition. They will just do it because they can then damn you for trying to undo it — if even possible. Does this seem to surpass even Orwell’s predictions? I’d say so.

Democrats already have schemes to do away with the Hyde Amendment. The prohibition of Government funds directly paying for abortions. Not that Planned Parenthoods do not already get enough taxpayer funds. Plus, removing that burdensome restriction will likely be a key part of any new Democrat healthcare bill, especially a single-payer one.

My fear is very justified and real. The dam withholding that evil — vastly worse than any of these singular things — is looming large over us. And if it were to open, the torrent of evil unleashed would make the status quo so far look like a kindergarten recess. Somehow I see those stalwart Leftisits just hoping and plotting to blow that dam wide open. They’ll even use the euphemisms of freedom , greater good or protections to do it. They have no clue what it would do. But then they don’t care.

Late term and partial birth abortion seem to be the final solution but it is not the final evil, I assure you. It may be only a foretaste of far worse to come.

Right Ring | Bullright

City’s Muddy Asset Forfeiture

The number of filings in Philadelphia is absurd. That is a racket much bigger than the Nigerian email scam. Only in this you don’t have to do anything to get cheated.

City Forced to Abolish Civil Asset Forfeiture and Pay Back Victims the Millions It Stole from Them

The innocent family that had their home seized by police through civil asset forfeiture fought back, and their victory will affect other residents for years to come.
Freedom Outpost

Philadelphia, PA – The city that has gained a reputation for the egregious civil asset forfeiture practices committed by its police department, will now be forced to dismantle the program altogether, as a result of a lawsuit filed by a family who had their home seized by police after their son was accused of a minor drug crime.

Residents who have been harmed by the Philadelphia Police department’s civil asset forfeiture practices could also receive part of $3 million in compensation. Markela and Chris Sourovelis initially filed a lawsuit in 2014 after their son was caught trying to sell $40 in heroin on the street.

The parents complied with the judge and took their son to a court-ordered rehabilitation treatment. But when they returned home, they found that police had locked them out of their house.

More: https://freedomoutpost.com/city-forced-to-abolish-civil-asset-forfeiture-and-pay-back-victims-the-millions-it-stole-from-them/

Praise and Thanks to Cecile Richards

Woman Celebrated For Killing 3.5 Million People

The Babylon Bee — May 1, 2018

U.S.—After her final day as president of abortion provider Planned Parenthood Monday, thousands of people took to social media to celebrate Cecile Richards and thank her for killing 3.5 million people during her tenure.

The nation offered kind remarks on Richards’ positive attitude, support for women’s rights, and ruthless genocidal efficiency.

The hashtag #ThankYouCecile began trending as Planned Parenthood supporters all across the country expressed their gratitude to a woman who orchestrated the wholesale destruction of millions of innocent people. Supporters stated they wanted to make sure her twelve years of service and bloodshed weren’t forgotten as she moved on to the next chapter of her life.

“Your fight for women’s rights and access to healthcare is an inspiration to all of us. Also how you took the idea of killing unborn babies from ‘safe, legal, and rare’ to ‘any time for any reason without apology and SHOUT YOUR ABORTION!’ in one decade! #ThankYouCecile” one woman in New York tweeted along with a picture of the outgoing Planned Parenthood president. “We all owe you an eternal debt of gratitude.” Other tweets and social media posts expressed similar sentiments, with thousands praising Richards’ fierceness, bravery, and cold-blooded brutality.

http://babylonbee.com/news/woman-celebrated-for-killing-3-5-million-people/

Cecile gets praised like a humanitarian. How does she top a professional record like that? That is not counting what she and PP have done to election politics.

Abortion: (just don’t call it by name)

Call it a “right”
Call it “healthcare”
Call it “choice”
Call it a “reproductive right”
Call it a “civil right”
Call it “safe”
Call it a “necessary”
Call it an “inconvenience”
Call it “fixing a problem”
Call it “responsible”
Call it “legal”

Call it anything… anything except what it is! Evil (that’s offensive) murder, genocide.

Does 60,383,268 in US since 1973 sound rare? (8.094,076 by PP) 2,009 just today.
Worldwide since 1980, nearly 1.5 billion.

Google does “gun” control

Look how Google does gun control, like they do everything. Add it to the mix.

Google tried censoring ‘gun’ shopping searches. It backfired

Philip Wegmann | Feb 27, 2018 | Washington Examiner

In the wake of the Florida school shooting, Google decided to take a stand. The gatekeeper of the Internet decided to filter shopping searches that included the term “gun.” It didn’t go so well.

Early Tuesday morning, Internet shoppers started noticing and documenting the digital gaffes. Users received error notices when they searched for glue guns and water guns, toy guns and airsoft guns, nail guns and nerf guns. The algorithm is apparently so strict that even the color “burgundy” triggered an error because it includes “gun” in the spelling.

This set off something of a parlor game on social media. Turns out, adults don’t like it when faceless bureaucrats try enforcing arbitrary restrictions — federal, corporate, or otherwise.

Casey “Stable Genius” Smith found that Google now censors “Laguna Beach.”

Technousayt observed that the beloved Tom Cruise film about beach volleyball, “Top Gun,” also could not be found.

Read more at: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/google-tried-censoring-gun-shopping-searches-it-backfired/article/2650230

So it got interesting in all kinds of ways. But it does show how active Google is about monitoring political debate. How many other filters are they now applying?

Follow the trail

It’s nothing new for creatively radical leftists. For instance, the media developed a new trend for pushing gun control. Fox already reported media pushing Florida teen survivors as ambassadors for gun control. Laura Ingraham asked who out there wants to take political advice from students? No one.

But that doesn’t stop MSM like CNN and MSNBC from using the teens as experts on all things guns. Great, they know so much about everything else, don’t they? So they put kids against pols as gun control advocates. It doesn’t stop there.

Another media trend: in a half hour segment on the Fla shooting, CNN put up a pundit from Brussels and then one from London to tell us what our gun laws should be. Of course they exploited the chance to tell us. CNN never said why their opinion was important.

Shame maybe? That’s it, they want to guilt us into gun control the same way media guilted the country into electing Obama — and then unable to throw him out like trash.

On a similar note, Tucker Carlson had a DACA advocate for illegal immigration who lectured about sanctuary cities and laws. Now illegals are telling us what our immigration law should be. He didn’t like Tucker saying he was not an American because he wasn’t a citizen. Yet bozo started every sentence saying “we” should… do this or that.

The arrogance knows no boundaries. We must heed the advice of non-citizens on our own country? Next they will try to lecture us on who to elect, vote for, and draft our laws. Illlegals already demand they will decide who immigrates here via chain migration.

See a trend? Have the outsiders, or those who are part of the problem, be policy experts. How about asking MS 13 gang members what we should do on gang violence? Let’s have inmates run parole boards. Ask children and minors to develop our drug laws.

Though supporting Brexit like Nigel Farage is smeared as illegitimate. So when you want your country back, you are labeled an extremist on the outside fringe — despite polls.

But we need to bring in outsiders to set our laws and policies … or get students to do it.
The new rule must be that citizens are overruled and irrelevant. The coup of America.

Right Ring | Bullright

CNN doling out marriage advice

Really now, taking advice on marriage from CNN is probably about the last thing most sane people would think of. And yes, it is every bit as bad as it sounds.

Dailywire

CNN, the network known for providing hard-hitting, always-truthful stories about the current political climate, took a day off from combing the White House halls for anonymous sources Thursday to issue a bit of marital advice. And as expected, it’s just as fantastic as their reporting.

According to CNN, perhaps the best thing to do for your relationship is to let your partner sleep with another person.

Read at Daily Wire

Wow, the things they can put out when the Fake News cycle gets a little slow behind the curtain. Looks like they are trying to make an apple out of a pineapple.

CNN could sponsor the next internet site launched to connect people. Ad campaign: “Hey couples, if your marriage is not already totally destroyed, there’s hope. You could consider this and give it the parting shot it needs.” – NADA; National Ass. of Divorce Advocates.

Anyway, you might scratch CNN off your list for marriage advice. (if it was ever on it)

Protest to Protest and F-bombs

Media swivels on its head like the exorcist movie to cover the “massive protests” going on everywhere and “all over the world.”

Before they get too full of themselves, just listen and no one knows exactly what they are protesting. (I think we know it is basically anti–Trump) Actions of a man who was just sworn in, when they organized protests weeks before.

Funny how they describe the “energy” of the protest march as infectious but failed to read the energy levels of the election, even in blue states.

Nevertheless, leave it to CNN in their breaking news coverage on protests, the anchor said: “Oh, Madonna is speaking … we HAVE to go to Madonna.” (just have to go there)

Madonna said welcome to the “revolution of love” before listing off reasons she is upset. Then to saying F-U not once, not twice but three times before they cut it off. She got the trifecta. Not even a voice-over when it happened. “Revolution of Love” to F-bomb?

What is wrong with that? Throwing to Madonna live at a campaign rally, what did they think she was going to say? What happened to media’s concerns about young children listening, at the protest or on TV, being offended by hearing that language?

Yet they did not cut it on the first F-bomb, or the second, but the third F-bomb.

Boy beheaded in India

4-year-old Indian boy reportedly beheaded in human sacrifice

A 4-year-old Indian boy was reportedly beheaded Wednesday in a ritual in a southern coastal region of the country in what was believed to be an offering to a deity.

The New Indian Express reported that the boy had been studying when he was kidnapped in the Prakasam district. The family grew alarmed when the boy, named L. Manusagar, failed to return home that afternoon.

A friend of the boy told his mother that he was taken by a man named Tirumala Rao, the report said. The mother arrived at the man’s house and reportedly found the body of her son in an otherwise empty home. He was decapitated and the report described a “utensil” that was filled with blood. The paper said it appeared to be an offering to a deity.

The villagers learned about the killing by the screams of the mother and were reportedly irate. They located the suspect, tied him up and set him on fire, the report said. He was rescued by police and taken to a local hospital in critical condition.

Original story: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/10/01/4-year-old-indian-boy-reportedly-beheaded-in-human-sacrifice/

Spinfest of 2015

If this year be known for anything remarkable, so far anyway, it should really be for spin. And everyone is in on the party, it’s fashionable — news, politicians, law, science, history.

We have riots they spin them into civil disobedience. Prosecutors spin their oath. Politicians spin their promises. We have Supreme Court decisions(spin in themselves) spinning the outcome in whichever direction they want. Supremes spin their decisions based on telepathy rather than words.

We got lectured from SCOTUS that words don’t matter in legislation anymore. It’s up to their divine interpretations to rewrite legislation according to some ESP intent. With words and meaning out of the way, things will be so much easier. What should any law mean if you cast off the meaning of words? Should it mean the same thing in the future it meant at a given time when they decided it? Why should it? Move on. Of course that fits that philosophy of evolving interpretations of everything. Thinking evolves too.

So we also evolved to same sex marriage. We’ve evolved even since the nineties. Remember the Defense of Marriage Act? But perhaps Bill Clinton was being prophetic when he said “It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” So whatever it means at the moment.

The evolution works well with the spin trend. They go together. Then why not just go out and spin your own reality? Gee thanks, Supremes, for the new “law of the land”.

Hillary shows her colors

Hillary finds her inner rainbow. Twitter feed. “Loud and Proud”

Hill Twit

A “History” theme, by a candidate who is running on her record while running from her records. History? Like using a private server or emails for gov business.

Hillary before (circa 2004):

“I believe marriage is…a sacred bond between a man and a woman….a fundamental bedrock principle that it exists between a man and woman, going back into the midst of history, as one of the founding, foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization. And that it’s primary principle role during those milennia has been the raising and socializing of children for the society into which they are to become adults.”

Say anything, do anything, be anything……. and forget everything.

Supreme decision marks the territory

The Supreme Court Ratifies a New Civic Religion That Is Incompatible with Christianity

by David French June 26, 2015 | National Review Online

The most striking aspect of Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges, which created a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, was its deep emotion. This was no mere legal opinion. Indeed, the law and Constitution had little to do with it. (To Justice Kennedy, the most persuasive legal precedents were his own prior opinions protecting gay rights.) This was a statement of belief, written with the passion of a preacher, meant to inspire.
Consider the already much-quoted closing:
” As some of the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage embodies a love that may endure even past death. It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.”
[…/]/
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420376/marriage-christians-religion-love?

Love substitutes for logic and the Constitution. They needed a trump card and they found one with love. Love is also kind, and you don’t see much of that from the LGBT lobby. But then what does love have to do with a lawsuit? When emotion is the basis for decisions, then how much further do we have to go?

Well, it sounds a lot more like the Woodstock decision

    Right behind you, I see the millions
    On you, I see the glory
    From you, I get opinion
    From you, I get the story

Ode to the rainbow

I used to like rainbows, way back, and I really have nothing against them. But now I suppose there will be another new term soon, rainbowphobia. Note to Websters’.

As of yesterday with the SCOTUS decision on same-sex marriage, I saw the rainbow on everything, everywhere in support of that agenda. Of course it was already bad enough that the LGBT community had co-opted the rainbow years ago. Suddenly it was everywhere as if planned yesterday. Anywhere they could stick it.

These days I guess everything is about associations or symbolic interpretations. Triggering is the buzzword for something that inflames one. It’s about common perceptions, new and evolving meanings. It’s about the meaning of something at a given time.

Since they attach the symbol to anything related to same-sex or LGBT, they lay claim to areas that used to mean something else, just like the rainbow. Meanings of words change and society is suppose to adapt. But one thing I will sadly miss is the rainbow – or the non-sexualized, time honored rainbow. We’ll probably be called phobic over it.

So I thought in honor of that a few special mentions and helpful reminders would be appropriate.(all quotes in NIV)

Gen 9:12-16

And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: 13 I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. 14 Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, 15 I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life. 16 Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth.”

Ezek 1:25-28

Then there came a voice from above the expanse over their heads as they stood with lowered wings. 26 Above the expanse over their heads was what looked like a throne of sapphire, and high above on the throne was a figure like that of a man. 27 I saw that from what appeared to be his waist up he looked like glowing metal, as if full of fire, and that from there down he looked like fire; and brilliant light surrounded him. 28 Like the appearance of a rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day, so was the radiance around him.

Rev 4:3

And the one who sat there had the appearance of jasper and carnelian. A rainbow , resembling an emerald, encircled the throne.

Rev 10:1-2

Then I saw another mighty angel coming down from heaven. He was robed in a cloud, with a rainbow above his head; his face was like the sun, and his legs were like fiery pillars. 2 He was holding a little scroll, which lay open in his hand.

Funny how the rainbow is now symbolic for gay issues or same-sex marriage. Normally, there are limits to symbols but there seems to be no limit to the ways they can use this one. I never understood the connection between this symbol and their cause.

They have reinterpreted the meaning of yet another time-honored historical thing. Or are we now somewhere over the rainbow? Perhaps we need a psychological term for their obsession with using the rainbow? The term could be rainbow-philia.

RightRing | Bullright

Obama finds his voice on Christians

I must first give my due sympathies and prayers to the evil shootings in Charleston, SC . Then Obama comes out to make his statement on it after the AG had opined on it. Loretta Lynch said that the Civil Rights team was already on the ground in Charleston. It’s horrible evil that should not have happened.

Anyway, Obama for months has been faced with evil. All the atrocities committed by ISIS and terrorists. Christians being persecuted, a genocide unfolding in the Middle East, and an ancient Caliphate resurfacing. In all these current happenings on his watch he could not even deliver lip-service toward Christian victims — even after being reminded.

He’ll describe any other aspects about them but, even when Christians were marched out to a choreographed beheading, he referred to Christianity as benignly as he could. Charles Krauthammer wrote of Obama during these evil persecutions, “Obama’s reaction to, shall we say, turmoil abroad has been one of alarming lassitude and passivity.”

The Islamists of the Caliphate released their beheading video under the title: “A Message Signed with Blood to the Nations of the Cross”. Obama, in a carefully crafted statement, referred to victims this way:

The United States condemns the despicable and cowardly murder of twenty-one Egyptian citizens in Libya by ISIL-affiliated terrorists. – More

Now anyone would have to be brain dead to intentionally not mention their Christian Faith, particularly as they testified with their final words. However, not to disappoint his astonishing record in hypocrisy and double standards, Obama finds his voice for Christian victimhood — sort of — in the evil execution of 9 Christians in Charleston this week. Washington Post has the video and transcript here.

Michelle and I know several members of Emanuel AME Church. We knew their pastor, Reverend Clementa Pinckney, who, along with eight others, gathered in prayer and fellow ship and was murdered last night, and to say our thoughts and prayers are with them and their families and their community doesn’t say enough to convey the heartache and the sadness and the anger that we feel.

Any death of this sort is a tragedy. Any shooting involving multiple victims is a tragedy. There is something particularly heartbreaking about a death happening in a place in which we seek solace and we seek peace, in a place of worship.

Mother Emanuel is, in fact, more than a church. This is a place of worship that was founded by African Americans seeking liberty. This is a church that was burned to the ground because its worshipers worked to end slavery.

When there were laws banning all-black church gatherings, they conducted church services in secret. When there was a nonviolent movement to bring our country in closer line with our highest ideals, some of our brightest leaders spoke and led marches from this church’s steps.

This is a sacred place in the history of Charleston and in the history of America.

The FBI is now on the scene with local police, and more of the bureau’s best are on their way to join them. The attorney general has announced plans for the FBI to open a hate crime investigation. We understand that the suspect is in custody, and I’ll let the best of law enforcement do its work to make sure that justice is served.

Until the investigation is complete, I’m necessarily constrained in terms of talking about the details of the case. But I don’t need constrained about the emotions that tragedies like this raise.

He makes sure to give due reference to the history and their faith. But look at the backdrop, or foreground as it were.

He referred the Church as a sacred place, particularly due to the church’s history in anti-slavery and its black heritage. That was the perspective he emphasized. That it happened to be a Christian one was secondary. Still he did find his voice for slain Christians.

He found that note, be it via black cultural heritage.

When you contrast that with Coptic Christians in the Middle East, whose heritage goes back over a thousand years, he could not even give lip service to their plight of persecution. It proved that once again, the only concern of Obama is politics, and next to that the cultural bent he chooses to see. He’ll mention Muslim hatred. Then he goes to a prayer breakfast to remind Christians of crusades and “terrible deeds”

So now he finds a way to address Christian murders. Now he is sympathetic to Christians?

Then he goes on to indulge himself in his ‘trigger warning’ message:

I’ve had to make statements like this too many times. Communities like this have had to endure tragedies like this too many times.

We don’t have all the facts, but we do know that once again, innocent people were killed in part because someone who wanted to inflict harm had no trouble getting their hand on a gun.

Now is the time for mourning and for healing. But let’s be clear. At some point, we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries. It doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency.

And it is in our power to do something about it.

So there we have it. He has again reduced a national evil event to a political debate on gun control. He even had to besmirch his recognition of Christian executions to an ideological tourniquet, when the hemorrhaging is coming from the Oval Office Ideologue in Chief. He is only interested in the black historical aspect of the event, and how it can be used to serve his ideological ends. Sure he gave due mention to their Christian faith, to black history, to anti-slavery, and then has wed it to his ideological battle.

The words “We shall overcome” have been co-opted by Obama’s political war.

Yet the real message in this evil is that, if you believe the reports of his motives, the shooter acting in racist hatred had wanted to ignite a race war. And now with the arraignment process, where victims families displayed the greatest character I’ve seen, Obama is the one igniting a war.

He and the Al Sharptons push a perpetual battle in their rhetoric. But I have not seen a hint of that by people in Charleston, or among victims. As if it were not even a possibility. That is American exceptionalism at its finest. Meanwhile, Obama digs into his bag of race-baiting right from the start.

Even as bad as playing the race card is the rush to a gun control.Unbelievably, it plays right into what the shooter had designed. Whether a war over race or war on guns, the incident was meant to inflame larger society. The only ones fanning those flames are the political ideologues and demagogues. Let us rise above race-baiting.

RightRing | Bullright

House Divided – 2: place your bets

[Pt #1]
Now leftist “progressives” want to cuckoofy anyone supporting traditions, values, founding principles, or our ability to speak up for them. Publicly or privately makes no difference. While those things are only reasonable to us, they turn even those ideas on their collective heads. So it’s a logical leap, to the left anyway, to plunge another step down the ladder to declare that any reluctance to support the LGBT agenda is either prejudiced or hate speech. Now they claim courage is best defined by Bruce Jenner in his sex change.

Never mind that for centuries we thought we knew how courage was defined. And dare you call courage something related to the military or war, or standing for freedom. Then the Left gets all bent out of shape at using the term courage toward soldiers. Use the term courage toward Chris Kyle, or American Sniper, and you get the ire of the left. How many other names or labels did they define him with?

Now it’s even gone another step lower on the integrity scale, to endorsing a field trip to a sex shop for middle school students. They will probably define that as a courageous stand — and no apology needed. Who do those parents think they are? What’s it to them?

A while back a public school teacher was compelled to apologize for having 5th grade kids send get well cards to a convicted cop killer in prison, and filling them in on his circumstances. But when she made her “apology,” people in the crowd yelled “you have nothing to apologize for”. Is that not revealing? Another thing to call courageous. People cannot even be outraged about that without getting attacked for their outrage.

But if you want to make a statement against police or call an entire police department or city “structurally racist,” be their guest and you’re applauded. No proof needed… surely you cannot deny it is. But when a Christian family criticizes leaking sealed reports about two under age victims for political purposes, then you are the bigot for complaining. The world, it seems, has been reversed and cranked to mach speed.

I posted an old report on Harry Reid taking an anti-illegal immigration stand in the early 90’s. Well, it seems hypocritical enough alone. But in the rhetoric Reid used lies the disturbing truth. Back then what Harry Reid was pushing in his bill was called “immigration reform”. He also took issue with the anchor baby policy. However, as evidenced in the last several years, the term immigration reform has been spun around to apply toward amnesty supporting illegal immigration, even open borders. See how the term changed? Democrats and Republicans are both guilty of the redefinition.

It turns out that things have reversed even in the past 20 years. So what was then considered “immigration reform” is now: “straight up racism. We want amnesty NOW!!! (and the votes that come with it) Borders are for bigots!” What happened? Anyone that can deny the change just isn’t living in this country.

Today doing something unconstitutional rallies applause. Calling a branch of government obsolete and irrelevant is in vogue. People demand more executive orders. Attack the Supreme Court in a SOTU address, bonus points and turn the attack into a campaign fundraiser. Years ago a national police would have been protested. Today progressives and activists demand the federal government take over the local police departments.

Take issue with the death of one person by cops and hold rallies in cities; shut down bridges, roads, traffic, or shopping centers at peak holidays. Hold marches chanting death to cops. Complain about police departments and politicize them. We saw how it works. Have mayors and officials tell cops to stand down while crowds loot and riot. Then ask the government for money to pay for damages. Tell store owners they should shut down and abandon their property. Pay for the political policies of leaders with the property of private store owners. Must be some form of reparations for slavery or something. Meanwhile, the slavery we are seeing is from thugs in the streets. HANDS UP…DON’T LOOT!

Finally, a stand-up comedian with a great reputation says the college campuses are too politicized, or politically correct, for his jokes. Yet an elitist political creature of Washington is paid 250,000 dollars to speak at Universities. No one bats an eye at that. Obama ran his campaign from Universities. The same colleges and Universities declare people speaking about Human Rights abuses are way too controversial for campuses and called trigger warnings. Organized anti-Semitic groups petition Universities to boycott Israeli students — persona non grata.

Protest a man be thrown out of Mozzila because he happens to hold traditional personal beliefs. A pizzeria makes a theoretical statement to not cater a fictional same-sex wedding and activists want it shut down, and threaten its owners. Don’t bake a cake for gay couple and you are shut down, hauled to court, threatened and defamed. Give to certain groups or try to support causes you agree with and you’re singled out if not by radicals as a bigot, potentially by a radicalized IRS. Sell the wrong legal merchandise in your store the government doesn’t like, wham you have big problems.

Try to start a 501-c3 to educate people and be attacked by mountains of regulations with bureaucrats from every alphabet agency of Government, which would make King George blush. Then the federal government seizes entire business accounts because it does not like your business. So do you ever hear liberals and progressives complain about these abuses or actions? You already know.

This is just a short list of examples. All have something in common. What once might have been taboo, perverse, abuse, harassment is now standard protocol. Want justice? Yea, they’ve sort of redefined that to proving your innocence first. King George would have been elated and rolling on the floor.

So the progressive left has big problems with people wanting to have some pride in our country and the rule of law, or its founding documents?

Sorry, I needed a new word – cuckoofy, I like it.

RightRing | Bullright

Hillary Road Tour Roundup

Surprise, surprise, Hillary has a staged and choreographed meeting with Iowans. Problem is they passed it off as meeting with average, everyday Americans.

Only in a world where “everyday Americans” are all Democrat organizers or activists. Yea, that’s the ticket. That could happen, sure.

A Democrat operative and a Planned Parenthood official sit down for a cozy chat, after being summoned, as just ordinary Americans. What’s another staged event between Democrats? The Left asks what’s the matter with that? How about everything.

Then once again, we have to read it from British news because media here dare not report the obvious truth. That would be traitorous. That is not the worst of it. Just look at Hillary’s statements vs. reality. She’s almost as good at escaping reality as Obama.

Statements that all her grandparents immigrated here. Well, not really. But her campaign explanation is that Hillary always thought of it that way. (and she always thought of herself as being president, too, so that means…) Yes, the explanation is as bad as her lie.

“All my grandparents, you know, came over here,” she said. A spokesperson said her “grandparents always spoke about the immigrant experience and, as a result she has always thought of them as immigrants.”

Just like she ran for cover in Bosnia under sniper fire, when there really was no sniper fire. Oops. So reality is only a figment of our imagination. About that misspeak, she said, “I say a lot of things — millions of words a day — so if I misspoke, that was just a misstatement.”

“We’ve got to figure out in our country how to get back on the right track.”

That’s as rich as it gets. She was part of Obama’s administration and admits we are not on the right track. Of course, polls reveal people do not believe we’re on the right track. (29.6 – right vs. 60.5 – wrong, after Obamacare) But sooner or later she will have to state where all she agrees with the administration and that she will continue those plans. Well, maybe a different day. Now she’ll say we need to get our country back on the right track. If we were serious about doing that, she is the last person the people should elect. Then she aimed at our broken political system.

“We have to start breaking down the divisions that have paralyzed our politics.”

Right, and who is that directed at? She’s been one of the most divisive persons in Washington, next to Obama. Hillary talked about getting dark money out of politics.

“We need to fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccountable money out of it once and for all, even if that takes a constitutional amendment.”

But while she is raising 2.5 billion dollars, she will spend as much money as needed to win. Then we can talk about limiting money. Now, she will talk about it while doing the opposite. Hillary is almost as big of Hypocrite as Obama. If she was not a hypocrite she couldn’t run. That’s a pregnant thought. There is no way she could run if she was honest. Start there.

At an Iowa event she said, lecturing about those at the top:

“The deck is still staked in favor of those already at the top. There’s something wrong when the CEOs make 300 times the typical worker. I want to stand up and fight for people…so that they can get ahead and they can stay ahead.” -[…stacked deck?]

“I’ve been fighting for children and families my entire adult life. I was thinking about the lessons I learned from my church. You are supposed to give back, you are supposed to do what you can to help others.”

That is, unless those others happen to be in a consulate in Benghazi asking for luxuries like more security, then she has to draw the line there. Once attacked, she has to lie about what happened for the good of those she is helping.

She listed her resume experience, adding, “and then as Secretary of State, standing up for our country.” Oh, is that what she calls it? As we knew then and know now, she was standing up for herself, to protect herself. Which means like setting up her own private server in NY and deleting what she chose from the record. I’d call that standing up for our country, like she did for an ambassador and three American heroes in Benghazi. Then being accountable (lack thereof) in the aftermath.

“So when I look at where we are as a country, I’m just so absolutely convinced that there isn’t anybody anywhere who can out-compete us, who has better values, who can do more to provide more people the chance to live up to their God-given potential. But we can’t take that for granted, and so I want to be the champion who goes to bat for Americans in four big areas, four big fights that I think we have to take on because there are those who don’t agree with what I think we should be doing. And they are pretty powerful forces.”

1-We need to build the economy of tomorrow not yesterday.

2-We need to strengthen families and communities because that’s where it all starts.

3-We need to fix our dysfunctional political system and get unaccountable money out of it once and for all, even if that takes a Constitutional amendment.

4-And we need to protect our country from the threats that we see and the ones that are on the horizon.

Fights, she calls them. Can you imagine the inner conflict going on in her head? Right, there is none, no conscience. The buzz word is always “fight”. From the woman who could not fight for those in a real fight in Benghazi, with their lives on the line for the country and her policies. But Democrats love to use the word fight all the time.

The only threats she is worried about are those which threaten her or the Clintons, i.e. emanating from the vast right-wing conspiracy — not the country. Iran, ISIS, Islamic terrorism, Boko Haram, or Russia… not so much.

Hillary’s campaign trail of lies, misspeaks, hypocrisy, double speak, double standards, evasion, and staged events. Void of the substance she claims to stand for.

RightRing | Bullright

Advocacy for death

I’ll post this piece because I was so struck by it. I guess suicide advocacy is on the rise though it still sounds like a marginal idea to me. But what was marginal 50 years ago is not so much now. Wesley Smith does an excellent job explaining the ideas.

Family-Supported Suicide Harms Society

by Wesley J. Smith March 21, 2015 | National Review – The Corner

There was once a time when friends, family, and society worked to prevent suicides. Now, if the suicidal person is ill or disabled, there is support for self-killing, with friends and family members even attending the deed.

That–and what it may portend–is the subject of my biweekly First Things. From, “Family-Support Suicide and the Duty to Die:”

Is it right or wrong to support a loved one’s suicide? This seems to be one of those issues, increasingly prevalent in our society, about which debate is not possible: The answer depends on one’s overarching worldview.

Some will believe that their duty is to support their family member’s choice, come what may. Others, including this writer, believe that supporting suicide is an abandonment that validates loved ones’ worst fears about themselves—that they are a burden, unworthy of love, or truly better off dead.

What might this phenomenon portend?

Family backing for suicide furthers the normalization of hastened death as a proper response to human suffering. Such normalization, over time, will put increasing pressure on those coping with the infirmities of age and with the debilitations of serious illnesses and disabilities to view their suicides as not only a suitable approach, but perhaps even as an obligation to those they love.

This is known in bioethics as the “duty to die,” which has been debated for years in professional discourse.

I quote some advocacy material for a duty to die:

A duty to die becomes greater as you grow older. . . . To have reached the age of, say, seventy-five or eighty years without being ready to die is itself a moral failing, the sign of a life out of touch with life’s basic realities.

This isn’t a fringe idea. Books have been written on the topic. I conclude:

No, a day won’t come when the euthanasia police kick down doors and force unwanted lethal injections upon the sick and elderly. But legal compulsion isn’t the only way to push people out of the lifeboat. The more public support families and friends give their ill or debilitated loved ones’ suicides, the greater the prospect that a moral duty to die will become culturally legitimate.

Again, I don’t see how we debate this. Either we want such a society, or we don’t.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/415774/family-supported-suicide-harms-society-wesley-j-smith

(Wesley J. Smith is a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center on Human Exceptionalism and a consultant to the Patient’s Rights Council.)

Also see First Things article

He has a followup post “$200,000 per Year to Push Assisted Suicide

Seems to be two issues here, what they are doing — or is it we — and the industry it has become. Neither of which bodes well for society.