Archive for the 'Common Sense' Category

Political Protestors

You’ve seen them.  They go to any non-liberal event and try to outnoise whoever is speaking to disrupt them and to keep people from hearing what the speakers have to say.  Isn’t this an infringement on the speaker’s right to free speech?  And if we have a right to free speech, doesn’t that go hand in hand with a right to free listening?  I believe it does.  We have the right to listen to whomever we want to listen to.  Otherwise, the right to free speech is useless. 

So here’s what I’m getting at.  Why do we allow these people to do it?  We let them stand there and shout and be in the way.  We let them take away our basic rights.  We can’t remove them by force, no matter how attractive that idea is.  It’s not legal so it puts us in the same group as them (annoying, uninformed assholes).  So it looks like we have to let them be there doing what they came to do.  They are going to disrupt the event no matter what we do, we have to just deal with that.  Here’s what I propose: 

First, we must NEVER do to them what they do to us.  Don’t try to drown out the speaker at liberal events.They are in the wrong and we mustn’t join that club. 

Second, bring a bullhorn to the event and get in THEIR face.  Stand right in front of them and say “blah blah blah” every time they speak.  We can’t stop them from disrupting, but we can stop them from spreading their message at events where no one in attendance wants to hear them.

Third, make your own signs supporting the event and stand right in front of the liberal sign holders to block anyone from seeing their sign.  They are pasty-skinned hippies who hate violence, we should have no problem outmaneuvering them. 

Don’t touch them unless it’s in self defense, and even then only when you have cameras on you to document the fact that they started the violence.  They often do because they are hypocrites who preach peace and love until someone gets on their nerves.  Simply stand in their way and smile, all the while blocking any attempt they make at disruption.  Fair play.

Are Muslims our enemies?

There’s a lot of talk these days about muslims.  Who are these guys?  What do they want?  Why do they keep trying to kill everybody?  It’s very confusing to a non-muslim.  You’ve got some people saying muslims are bad, and some people saying only some muslims are bad, and some people saying muslims are all peaceful.  What’s a poor white guy to think?

In my opinion, it boils down to one thing.  Sharia.  Sharia is islamic law.  It’s the thing that some countries have that makes clerics able to tell the government what to do.  And it is completely incompatible with Democracy.

I’m sure not all muslims are our enemies.  At least that is my hope.  But what makes one muslim our enemy and another muslim our friend?  Sharia.  If someone is in favor of replacing the US Constitution with the koran and governing the USA with sharia law, that person is our enemy.

Racial Profiling

A letter to Congress to address the House’s passing of legislation that will make profiling illegal:

According to the Congressional Research Service, profiling is defined “as
the practice of targeting individuals for police or security interdiction,
detention or other disparate treatment based primarily on their race or
ethnicity [or religion], in the belief that certain minority groups are more
likely to engage in unlawful behavior.”

Well, the fact is that certain minority groups ARE more likely to engage in
unlawful behavior.  Look at statistics.  It is simply common sense to
acknowledge this fact.  It is foolishness to deny it.  When certain minority
groups stop doing the majority of the crimes, then it will be appropriate to
stop profiling. 

While profiling based on race, religion or ethnicity is not guaranteed to be
100% effective law enforcement (Timothy McVeigh and John Walker Lindh, both white males, would not be identified), the majority of people committing
crimes WOULD fall into one of the profiled catagories.  How can you deny
this to be true?  Your first instinct might be to call me racist, but is
anything I’m saying not factually true?  And is it racist to call something
what it is?  Let’s get a grip on our thought processes here and use facts
instead of feelings to make policy decisions.  Look at the way the world is
today, the problems we have now that we didn’t used to have, and deal with
them in an intelligent way.  Maybe there are things we don’t want to do that
are just necessary now.  This is important stuff, lives depend on it.  The
right choice might be a tough one, it might be an unpopular one, but that
doesn’t make it less right. 

The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the right to be safe from unreasonable search and seizure without probable cause. Perhaps what needs to be addressed is the definition of what is “unreasonable”
today under the current circumstances. 

It’s a fact that the majority of terrorist activity in the world today is done by Arab-looking males between the ages of 18 and 40.  It is nothing less than incompetence to ignore this fact.  Another thing to consider; what are gangsters and gang members known for?  Charity work?  I don’t think so.
That is another very specific look, and to not suspect people who insist on
adopting that look is just plain stupid.  When a guy who looks like he might
put a gun in your face actually puts a gun in your face because you ignored
common sense and didn’t keep a distance between you and him, will you still say profiling is wrong?   Will you not learn from that lesson, assuming you’re still alive, and do some intelligent profiling next time you’re in that situation?

Profiling works.  To outlaw it so we don’t hurt anyone’s feelings shows a
complete lack of common sense and an inability to act intelligently.

Virginia Tech

There’s about to be a big debate, so here’s my two cents worth.

“What is the militia?  It is the whole people.  To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” – George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights)

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Thomas Jefferson

You’ve probably seen the bumper sticker that says “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns”.  Now you have proof that the framers had that opinion too.

Imus

Heard a rap song lately?

The “we can say it but you can’t” crap needs to stop.  Either it’s wrong to say or it’s not wrong to say.  You can’t have it both ways.  Pick one. 

Urine Test

I got an email today that has one of the best ideas I’ve heard in a long time.

Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I  pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as they see fit. In  order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test,  which I have no problem with. 

What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people  who don’t have to pass a urine test. Shouldn’t one have to pass a urine  test to get a welfare check, because I have to pass one to earn it for  them? 

Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their  feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sit on  their butt. Could you imagine how much money the state would save if  people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?

Gee, We Sure Are Sorry….

An apology by someone who wasn’t involved in what is being apologized for is worthless.  “We need closure!”  If I tell you I’m sorry my great great grandfather did something bad to your great great grandfather, what the hell good is that?  How is that closure? 

We regret that certain things happened, and if it was possible to go back in time and undo it many of us would.  That’s pretty much as good as you’re gonna get without a flux capacitor.  If an “official apology” by completely uninvolved people makes you happy, you’re as shallow as you are unrealistic. 

The problem is not that your ancestors were abused.  That WAS the problem.  Some incredible people fought for the freedom that they regretably didn’t have, and they won.  They won.  Everyone in America today gets the same tools for success that white people get.  That is your victory, and it’s huge.  So why is the success still so unbalanced?  THAT, my non-white friend, is the problem today.  And I think I have the answer.  I’ve pondered and debated it with people a lot lately, and the conclusion I’ve come to is this.  The Black community in America, in general, sees success as a white thing.  And there is so much resentment and even hatred towards Whites that Black America doesn’t want to appear to be “acting white”.  But what Black America is missing is that the opportunity to be successful here is what was fought so hard for during the Civil Rights Movement.  You won the race but you’ve rejected the prize.  By not taking advantage of school and earning a high school diploma, by not waiting to make babies until you’re financially stable, by not staying out of trouble with the law, you are slapping Dr. King in the face.  You are making pointless everything he and many others went through.  If you aren’t willing to be responsible and do what is necessary to live a decent life, that’s on you.  You can’t blame my ancestors for your current situation, because your ancestors have already fixed it.  All you have to do is take advantage of what they couldn’t.

And apologizing for history is just stupid.