Politics

Can Congress Impeach a Private Citizen? Let’s Hope Not

Are you paying attention? Biden has been in office for one week, ONE WEEK, and he’s already signed close to 30 executive orders. Who needs congress when we have a dictator that takes things into his (her – because let’s be honest, Kamala is behind this push, too), hands? Who needs the people when we have a dictator that knows what’s best for the people? Who needs jobs when we have a dictator, and his minions, who simply tell you to “find another job?” Who wants to be energy independent when we can get our energy from foreign countries so they can blackmail us into doing what they want us to do in exchange for said energy?

Biden has “fundamentally changed” America is less than one week. On the surface, this is alarming but let’s be fair, let’s see how this is actually going to translate in the coming weeks. But I’ll be honest, this is a lot in a little time and if that doesn’t make you nervous, it should.

And this whole impeachment thing with Trump? Still? MOVE ON PEOPLE. I swear, some of these left-leaning Democrats are obsessed with Trump and they’re having a hard time letting go of him and their obsession. Newsflash – YOU WON. Let it go! That’s like winning a tennis match and then immediately jumping over the net to beat your opponent to a pulp. It’s petty and disturbing. Trump is no longer a threat to you and your radical agendas. You have a commander-in-chief who is making decisions on your behalf, isn’t that what you wanted? Isn’t it all you dreamed it would be?

Trump is a private citizen now. You can’t, and/or should not, be able to impeach a private citizen. And if our crazy left-leaning radicals pull this off, then every American should be scared because then they’ve set the precedent to come after YOU. Or anyone who disagrees with them. ME.

Senator Rand Paul gives a scorching argument against impeaching Trump. We must have rules in this country – our constitution is our rule document. We must abide by her because if we do not, then the United States is no longer a free country. And judging by Biden’s executive order frenzy? I’m beginning to think we’ve already lost a lot of that freedom.

Paul, with sound logic, rightfully called out Democrats on the unmistakable double standard of the impeachment charade.

Since when did rhetoric from politicians become ripe for unprecedented actions such as a post-presidency impeachment trial? More importantly, as Paul noted on Tuesday, “Democrats insist on applying a test of incitement to a Republican that they refuse to apply to themselves.”

Arguably, the left’s campaign of harassment, intimidation and violence, as well as the progressive advancement of cancel culture, helped lead to the events of Jan. 6 as much as anything. Yet the Democratic Party has absolved itself of years of inflammatory rhetoric that has left millions of Americans feeling pushed into a corner.

In their attempts to undercut and oppose Trump, elected Democrats uttered words and took actions that defied the civility they now claim they want to restore.

But when looking at the incursion at the Capitol, their selective memory on political violence and inflammatory rhetoric shows that they are after what they’ve always been after — the destruction of Trump as a political force and the demonization of all those who supported the former president.

Those loyal supporters supported Trump even in the face of threats, violence and the potential cancelation of their livelihoods.

Democrats are playing the role of victim after years of stoking civil unrest.

The hypocrisy isn’t lost on Paul. It shouldn’t be lost on anyone else, either. Source

Politics, Twitter Messages

Defining Conservative Values – Response to TikTok Video and Tweet

Hang on to your seats, friends, I’m fired up.

I watched this on TikTok and felt compelled to answer Sarah’s challenge on Twitter. Also, good question, Sarah. I think this topic needs to be fully analyzed and explained over and over and over again, if that is what it takes to finally educate people on what Conservatism is. Too many people out there have a vastly incorrect assumption about Conservatives and Conservative values. And that’s really no fault of their own, the media and social media, heck, even our government, has done an excellent job of turning the narrative on its ear and convincing people that the things they say Conservatives are for are actually what the far left stands for. The far left are masters at deflecting and emotive manipulation.

And let me clarify, I’m talking about the FAR LEFT. I don’t believe most Democrats feel this way. I feel like the Democrats have also been hi-jacked and are no longer truly represented because the FAR LEFT have become so loud and prominent in their bullying tactics, thanks largely to Facebook and Twitter, that the Democrat values have been swallowed whole.

And let’s be clear (that seems to be a buzz phrase right now) – I have no ill will against Sarah or this young man in the video. I don’t know either of them. I’m simply responding to this man’s perceptions and Sarah is simply asking a question. I know asking questions seems to be taboo right now but since when I have I ever conformed to group think?

Precisely.

But let’s break this down for those that are truly interested in learning the truth about Conservative and Conservative values.

First, watch the TikTok video and then let’s break it down:

Here are some Conservative principles:

  • The federal government is instituted to protect the rights bestowed on individuals under natural law. It exists to preserve life, liberty and property — a mission that includes not only protecting the sanctity of life but defending freedom of speech, religion, the press and assembly, and the right of individuals to be treated equally and justly under the law, and to enjoy the fruits of their labor.
  • The federal government’s powers should be limited to only those named in the U.S. Constitution and exercised solely to protect the rights of its citizens.
  • Government functions best when it is closest and most accountable to the people and where power is shared between the federal government and the states.
  • Individuals and families make the best decisions for themselves and their children about health, education, jobs and welfare.
  • America’s economy and the prosperity of individual citizens are best served by a system built on free enterprise, economic freedom, private property rights and the rule of law. This system is best sustained by policies that promote general economic freedom and eliminate governmental preferences for special interests, including free trade, deregulation, and opposing government interventions in the economy that distort free markets and impair innovation.
  • Tax policies should raise the minimum revenue necessary to fund only constitutionally appropriate functions of government.
  • Regulations should be limited to those that produce a net benefit to the American people as a whole, weighing both financial and liberty costs.
  • Judges should interpret and apply our laws and the Constitution based on their original meaning, not upon judges’ own personal and political predispositions.
  • America must be a welcoming nation — one that promotes patriotic assimilation and is governed by laws that are fair, humane and enforced to protect its citizens.
  • America is strongest when our policies protect our national interests, preserve our alliances of free peoples, vigorously counter threats to our security and interests, and advance prosperity through economic freedom at home and abroad. Source

Here is a picture that sums up our values. This picture is specific to Texas but it encompasses all Conservatives.

I hope breaking these down helps. Because ALL information helps one make better choices.

Now. Let’s break down this young man’s erroneous assumptions about Conservatism.

Continue reading “Defining Conservative Values – Response to TikTok Video and Tweet”

Politics

“The Time is Always Right to do What is Right.”

These Martin Luther King, Jr. quotes are still, if not more, relevant in today’s world. He was a kind, loving, insightful man of his time who only wanted to peaceably co-exist with one another. He wanted justice for all, not just for African-Americans. We are all human, our skin color is not important. It infuriates me that the left continually pound this racial divide and yet they claim they want unity and are “tolerant” of others.

If you want unity and tolerance, then practice what you preach. Actions speak louder than words.

 

We will never, NEVER, all see eye-to-eye. It will never happen. And bullying your views onto people who don’t believe or think the same as you WILL NOT UNIFIY US. It will only serve to further divide us. Perhaps that’s the end goal, to drive a wedge so deeply that the gap will never be closed. And if that’s the goal, then own it. Don’t pretend you want to unify and compromise with people as long as they unify and compromise your way.

That’s not the definition of unity and/or compromise. Look it up.

Realistically, I think we are too divided to be united at this point in time. Especially with an incoming party who are prepared to do anything and everything in their power to silence you. Newsflash, that is NOT going to unify America. And of course they know that but they continue to do what they do best, lie to our faces and a large part of the country just mindlessly lap it up.

Here are more MLK quotes that I hope inspire you:

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

Meaning: “Justice is an abstraction, a generic and theoretical state of perfect harmony in which everything is in a fair balance. But each injustice is a very real, very specific flaw in that balance. Even if we can’t really pin down what we mean by “justice” overall, it’s relatively easy and deeply true to identify specific injustices, and do something about them. And the thing about injustice is, once one realizes that is what it means (i.e. an unfair imbalance in the social order), it does no good to shrug one’s shoulders and say, “Who cares? Those poor souls may be getting a raw deal but it’s not affecting me any.” Because an imbalance in the system does affect you — it affects everyone. If a boat is capsizing because it’s out of balance, everyone on board is going to get wet, not just the fools who are causing the imbalance. Thus, if we let an injustice — an imbalance — get too far out of hand anywhere, it threatens to undermine and capsize the entire ship of state, to everyone’s harm. That’s why “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” Source

“Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

Meaning: “If you’re going to try to drive out hate, you need to bring the love. It won’t be pleasant, but it’s the truth. Bringing the love doesn’t mean you believe as they do, or even that you like them. It simply means that you consider the human bond to be stronger than their hate.

If you match them hate for hate, the world will not be a better place for your effort. What little satisfaction you gain will be temporary at best, and will eventually be to the determent of everyone. That’s neither a good plan, nor is it much of a legacy for our children to inherit, a world filled with more hate than ever.

It is my belief that most hatred is based on inaccurate information, or on stories told about injustices of old. The hate can only be kept alive if the recipients of the hate act according to the script. The most disruptive thing we can do to the script is to show them love and compassion, and blow the narrative apart. Are you willing to try?” Source

“The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.”

I love this quote because I think it perfectly summarizes the times we live in right now. It’s easy to step onto our podium, point fingers and “preach” about how we should, or should not live  our lives according to the group who yells the loudest, or throw labels loosely around like so much confetti, especially when everything is peaceful and quiet. We have food, shelter, security, we can afford to be magnanimous. But when things get tough, like it’s starting to get now, our freedoms start being stripped way, our voices are being actively muted, our votes are not worth the paper they are printed on, THAT is when our true characters will shine through. Are we tough enough to stand up and say enough is enough? I think we can be, but I also think we’re not quite there …. yet.

“Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.”

Meaning: “He’s essentially saying that freedom has to be fought for. It will be not be given to us by those in power and authority; we need to take it for ourselves. Yes, as human beings we’re all free and the Constitution says we’re all equal, but out in the real world we need to struggle in order to gain and secure our civic freedoms. This is King’s general message, one that has universal application to all of us, irrespective of race.” Source

Our freedoms are being attacked right now. You can roll your eyes or you can pull your head from the sand, it’s happening. The oppressor is our government, both federal and local, media, and social media. They are attacking our freedom to voice our concerns, to vote for our candidates and suppressing information. If the thought of no longer having a voice and being part of a collective doesn’t scare the shit out of you, it should.

“True peace is not merely the absence of tension; it is the presence of justice.”

Without law and order, we can not have peace. Think of what happened with the BLM and Antifa riots, how out-of-control they were allowed to get because we pushed, and continue to push, to defund the police. Entire blocks of cities were burned to the ground. People were murdered and continue to be murdered because there are not as many law enforcement officers patrolling. And an entire block was “captured” and “renamed” as it’s own province because we were all too scared to stop it.

Would you say it’s peaceful right now? Of course not. Things are worse than ever because we have fallen in line with a radical group of people who tout getting rid of law enforcement. We will never experience peace if we don’t have law and justice.

Never.

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

Again, this is more true today than ever. Our way of lives, our freedoms, our constitution, is being threatened because we do not speak up about the injustices that are happening right now. But we’re just protecting you from the big-bad virus, we’re just protecting you from social injustice, we’re protecting you from YOURSELVES. It’s a guise to make people feel like they are being cared for when really they are being controlled. And they, meaning the Socialists and the Marxists who are in control right now, will only continue to chip away at your right to live your life the way you see fit because no one will stand up, no one will speak because they are afraid of being called names.

Being called names, or being labeled this or that is PRECISELY the strategy they play because they know it works. Stop caring what people think. Stop caring if someone labels you. If you are standing up for what is right then who cares what others think. At least you’re not going down without a fight.

“In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”

Precisely. When we look back on this time period, we will not remember how our enemy took over or what  our enemy said, we will remember that we, the people, did not stand up and fight back. We allowed it to happen.

“Be a bush if you can’t be a tree. If you can’t be a highway, just be a trail. If you can’t be a sun, be a star. For it isn’t by size that you win or fail. Be the best of whatever you are.”

I love this quote. So many people say, “but what can I do?” Something. Anything. Start small. Talk to your friends and family. Volunteer in your community. Rally for candidates that you believe in. SPEAK UP. Sitting passively back and allowing the shit to be thrown at you just makes a mess. And no one is happy living in squalor.

“The time is always right to do what is right.”

That time is right now.

Read Martin Luther King Jr’s famous speech here. You can listen to it here.

Politics

Oh Look! There Goes Our Freedom of Speech – Everyone Wave Goodbye!

Watch this:

Did you laugh? Crack a smile?

If not, I’ve got nothing more to offer you.

*sigh*

What a week, right? In a lot of ways, I feel like this actress in the above video – I keep circling back to the same place but I’m lost every time I get there. Nothing makes sense and yet, it all seems familiar.

I had no idea what was happening on Wednesday. I was at work and (thankfully) immersed and focused on clinic. It wasn’t until Kevin text me that I had an inkling of what was happening.

Huge crowds in Washington DC. Trump making speech.

Protestors storm the capital – people have been shot. 

At first, I was like, “cool! People showed up! I wonder if that will help at all.”

And then, “crap. People storming the capital will NOT help at all.”

After clinic was over, I started trolling (reliable) news sources. It looked bad but I reserved judgement.

When I came home, I watched (trusted) commentaries and I. GOT. FIRED. UP.

I sat down and pounded out a heated blog post. I got my frustrations off my chest and I felt satisfied with my words. I scheduled it to post the next day. I went to bed.

I got up the next morning and deleted my post.

It was too heated. It was too biased. And I didn’t want to be a typical Democrat and run off my emotions. I needed to take a minute to breathe and look at the BIG picture. Remember? I challenge myself to remain balance and look at all sides of an issue. It’s not always easy, but I think we all need to challenge ourselves to approach difficult times this way.

And now, here we are several days later and honestly, I think the violence at the capital is the least of our concerns at this point in time.

It’s official, Biden/Harris will be in the White House for the next four years. Georgia elected their Democrat candidates (whether that was a fair election or not remains to be seen – isn’t it sad that we will continue to question the validity of elections from this point on? Even if the Republicans win, we’ll ask ourselves – was it fair??) and now we have a one-party rule. The Democrats are in power and there is NO telling what kind of damage they will inflict the next four years (hopefully two years if we can get more Republican candidates into the House or Senate). They have the power to pass anything. A.N.Y.T.H.I.N.G. Whose going to stop them?

NOBODY.

This fact alone makes me very uncomfortable. And a little scared, to be honest. Take notice, readers, who knows what our country will look like by 2024.

The attack on the capital was not cool. I don’t support it. Violence is never the answer. But I understand it. People were worked up into a frenzy these past two months. We had Trump yelling from the rooftops that the election was a fraud and he actually won. We had Sidney Powell yelling from the rooftops that “she was going to bring on the Kracken.” We had Rudy Guiliano touting his legal team and they were building evidence and were confident they could turn this around. These people gave us hope. They made us believe, though not easy, we had one last chance to turn this nightmare around.

And then … crickets. Nothing. All of the hoopla just sort of died down. Still. I was hopeful. Maybe they were keeping their cards close to their chest, I thought. They didn’t want to show their hand too soon. I could understand that. I was thankful they were doing that. I was hopeful they had an ace up their sleeve. And who knows, maybe they did? But when the courts came back and told them they didn’t have standing and then the Supreme Court refused to hear their case, I knew it was over. I just didn’t see how Trump would pull it off. Still. I had a bit of hope. He’s always managed to get things done in the past. Surely he would pull this off? And he continued to give people hope. He refused to concede. He made it seem like we had a chance at the January 6th Electoral Count. He encouraged people to show up to help support him. And he led people to believe if they would just show up in support on January 6th, we could turn this around.

Now maybe Trump didn’t come right out and say this, but he certainly implied it – I don’t think he ever flat out denied it. But it was enough to spur people into action and they showed up. By the thousands. Which was cool – it showed that people still cared what happened to our country and were worried a Democrat monopoly would ruin our country. But as is often the case when you have thousands of people show up to an event and emotions are running high and they are frustrated and tired of being ignored and/or labeled every time they express concerns or dare to ask a question, you have chaos.

Who knows what sparked the deluge on the capital. Emotions were running so high it wouldn’t have taken much to light that powder keg to begin with. It was a desperate attempt to try and take back control over something they didn’t have any control over for a very long time. Was it right? No. Of course not. But it was human.

And let’s be honest. The woman who got shot trying to climb into a window with a backpack on … it was the only thing that COULD happen. In the moment, in the middle of sheer chaos, those security guys had no idea what her intention was. They had no idea what was in the backpack. They did their jobs, they protected the capital. It was sad it turned out that way, but you can’t act aggressive in situations like that and not expect consequences.

When that happened, I knew it was over for Trump. And indeed, he has had people jumping ship ever since that incident. People are distancing themselves from him because they don’t want to go down with him. Trump is now toxic, politically speaking. It’s sad, but again, I understand the emotion behind it.

Did I think Trump wanted that to happen? Of course not. Do I think Trump encouraged people to show up and act like fools? No. But I think his rhetoric had that unintentional effect.

Biden had the perfect, PERFECT, opportunity to practice what he has been preaching from the beginning of his campaign – unity. Let’s all come together. That situation was the perfect backdrop – everyone agreed it was unacceptable. No one defended the attack on the capital. But Biden/Harris didn’t do that because they do what every Democrat is pre-programmed to do – they took advantage of the crisis and turned it political. Not only did they turn it political, but they further twisted that screw into the narrative to try and blame racial divide. If this is not positive proof that the Biden/Harris administration has NO DESIRE to bring people together, I honestly don’t know what further proof you need.

This is just a TASTE of the divisiveness heading our way. I hope you have a firm hold of something because it’s going to be a bumpy and ugly ride.

It absolutely sickened me the way Biden and Harris handled that situation. They were almost gleeful that they were able to use this as yet another hit on the wedge between sides. They want it their way, or no way. There is no compromise.

Which leads me to the issue I feel is the most serious – the way the social platforms are treating this. Facebook / Twitter have banned President Trump’s account. Facebook has been going through and deleting conservative groups consisting of a million people. These platforms are systematically “purging” any and all opinions that do not support their agenda. And remember the Section 230 hearing that I broke down for you? It’s been voted down. Approving Section 230 would have made Facebook and Twitter publishers, meaning they would not be able to censor people on their platform – they would, under law, have to allow dissenting viewpoints. But since it was not approved, they are not publishers, they remain private companies and they can do what they please. Which, to be fair, is right. They are private companies. People do not have to use them, but what are the alternatives? Facebook and Twitter have been successful in squashing every competitor. Their latest attempt has been to try and de-platform Parler, a site that is similar to Twitter. Apple Play Store and Google Play Store have already removed the ability to download the Parler app onto your phone. Their rationale? They don’t want to promote hate speech. They believe these platforms are what instigated and coordinated the attack on the capital. The real reason? They don’t want to give people a platform in which they dare to express opinions different than their own. They want to make it difficult for conservatives to have a place where they can voice their thoughts and opinions.

It’s 1984 come to life. It’s what Communist China does to their people. They are allowed to use tightly controlled programs that their government manages so they can ensure their message, and no opposing thoughts or opinions, gets to the people. It gives me goosebumps to think we’re heading in the same direction. And do you think Biden/Harris will stop it? NO. They want to do MORE. They don’t think we’ve done ENOUGH censoring.

And it’s all fine and dandy to agree with this censorship when you agree with what is being pushed, how are you going to feel when YOU’RE censored? How would you feel right now if the conservatives were doing this to you and your opinions were left out to dry? I’m betting you wouldn’t be so supportive at that point. Who’s to say it won’t happen to you? What are you going to do? What can you do? Any and all people who might be able to help have already been silenced.

Was Trump annoying with his messages? Yes. Was he less than tactful at times and a bit of a bully? Unquestionably. Did he deserve to be censored? No. Our freedoms of speech are being seriously attacked here and if we don’t fight this it will disappear.

Even if you’re NOT a conservative, would you want that? Remember. As long as you are agreeing with the agenda and going along with the plan, you’re fine to speak up. What happens if you disagree? What happens when you’re no longer allowed to voice your concerns? What happens when your questions are twisted and distorted and you’re called a racist for simply ASKING A DAMN QUESTION?

*takes a breath*

Whew. I need to calm down. I’m getting heated again. But what is happening right now? SHOCKS AND SADDENS ME. And scares me, quite frankly.

I deleted my Twitter account today. My Facebook account has been deleted for quite some time. And not using those platforms does not bother me, they are free platforms free to do what they want. I figure as long as you’re using their product you have to play by their rules. Don’t like them apples? Them dump the basket. But the fact that they are a monopoly and SO big and virtually untouchable, that scares me. What’s the alterative? Right now, we don’t have one.

But then again, why does it really matter? We have certainly survived without these social platforms before, we shall survive without them again. We have the media to …

Oh wait.

We DON’T have the media. The big names, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, FOX  are just as bad as Facebook and Twitter. In fact, they are worse. Because they cherry pick news stories. They take things out of context and twist them into something that resembles THEIR truth. And people buy it, hook, line and sinker. They bend over and cough. They open their mouths and say, “spoon feed me more of your truth please because it hurts my brain too much to resist your crap.”

*sigh*

This is madness, people. Absolute madness. Where do we go from here? What’s next? I think President Trump has given us a hint:

This was posted on the POTUS Twitter account that Obama set up and will transfer to Biden. I think it’s still active, who knows. But the fact that Trump eludes to something coming gives me hope.

Look. This whole situation goes way beyond Trump. In fact, it’s not even about Trump anymore, it’s about Freedom of Speech. There are some people out there that think Trump should run in 2024. I disagree. I think he needs to be done with politics. I’m confident he will never win the presidency again. And if he ran, that would just prevent another Republican candidate of having any chance at all.

No. I think he should stay out of politics. What I think he should do is build a company, a network, a social media platform, that will give Facebook and Twitter a serious run for their money. I think he should build a platform where conservatives can voice their opinion and have a place to express their freedoms of speech. I think that is the only way we’re going to squelch this gross abuse of power from Facebook and Twitter. Trump has the money, he has the brains, and he has the business sense to get it done. And it would give him the ultimate revenge against these companies that tried to muzzle him, and his followers. I have no idea what he has up his sleeve, but I really hope this idea is on the table for him.

So now what? What do we do now? We stay alert and pay attention to what is going on around us. We take a stand and we do NOT allow anyone to silence us. We have gotten to a point where we can’t even ask questions. If you think the Democrats will be satisfied now that Trump is out of office? Think again friends. With Trump gone, who’s left? Conservatives. Us, the people who dare disagree with their radical agendas.

If this sounds dramatic it’s because it is. We’re reached that point. There are no more obstacles. The Democrats have nothing standing in their way. They can do whatever they want because they have complete control.

You asked for it. Here we go. Whatever happens? Is on the people who voted for Biden/Harris. Be careful what you wish for.

Since we started with something funny, let’s end on something funny. I’ve been a fan of JP’s for a while now. Enjoy.

Politics, Twitter Messages

Evil Santa, Out-of-Control Teacher, Heart-Wrenching Plea

What would you do if Santa did something like this to your kid?

Santa tells this little boy he won’t bring him a nerf gun for Christmas. Why? Because Santa is a leftist and he just can’t resist pushing an agenda. Santa is not rude, but he’s firm. This little boy will forever remember the year Santa denied him his wish. This little boy will likely think he wasn’t good enough because why would Santa deny him his one wish?

There is a time and place to voice your opinion and/or argue or defend an agenda – making children cry when you’re being paid to bring joy and magic to a child’s life is NOT the time.

Asshole.

______________________________________________________

Bit*h, kill yourself. Go f*ck yourself.” That’s what this crazy woman shouted at the protestors across the street.

Dude, she’s a TEACHER.

Why? Because these protestors dared to protest the lockdowns and the insane COVID restrictions these crazy governors have implemented.

What would possess … wait – that’s it, she’s possessed. What would make a person completely lose her mind like this? First of all, learn some control, Chica. Secondly, the people protesting? Have just as much right to voice their concerns as you do to yell obscenities. Thirdly, here’s a thought, ignore them. Fourth, why so ANGRY?! What is up with people just going hysterical when they see a person, or a group, who thinks differently than they do?

Calm down. Seriously. Calm down.

If you’re feeling frustrated and need to vent, as we all do from time-to-time, go punch a pillow, or scream in your car with the windows rolled up and away from people. Let it out in a non-aggressive, non-violent way. Doing this? Screaning your fool head off and completely losing your mind just makes you look straight up crazy.

Did I mention she’s a TEACHER?? Wow. Just wow.

Added: The teacher has been suspended and is on paid leave. First of all, PAID leave? Not very severe consequences for her actions. Secondly, a commenter on the story said something along the lines, “now, we don’t know what is going on with this woman. Maybe she just lost a loved one from COVID.” And yes, there are always two sides to a story. However, NOTHING justifies her out-of-control rage and NOTHING ever justifies telling someone to kill themselves. Ever. I don’t care what side of the fence you eat your French fries on. So no. There is no justifying this behavior. This woman has anger issues and she needs to seek counseling. Period.

______________________________________________________

This made me cry.

This poor woman. You can hear her anguish. You can see her frustration. You can feel her fear. There are THOUSANDS of small business owners all across the country who will not survive these lockdowns. The left is systematically shutting down these small businesses leaving room for the big companies, the conglomerates, a pathway to get bigger and more powerful. How is this compassionate? How is this fair? How is this ethical? How is this LEGAL?? This woman is literally BEGGING for help. We have crossed the line. We continue to over-react to this virus. When will it stop. When will it stop?

Nearly 20% of America’s restaurants have closed permanently because of the lockdowns and another estimated 10,000 will close before this pandemic is over. The government has intentionally decimated this industry. How can anyone feel less than rage over this?? IT’S WRONG AND EVIL to decide another person, or entity’s, future. My God, we are heading down a dangerous road here.

If you haven’t seen these stories, you’re watching the wrong news. I recommend checking out The Tatum Report and NewsMax for more REALISTIC news.

Don’t be a sheeple.

Also – see this post to restore peace and tranquility in your life after this post.

Back to our regularly scheduled blog …

Politics

Censorship is Good, as Long as You’re Not Censoring Me

I wonder how different this conversation would be going if Twitter and Facebook were censoring Democrats and the far left. I’m betting they wouldn’t be calling for MORE censorship if that was the case.

Be careful what you wish for.

This is a hearing summary according to my interpretation. I’m not saying my interpretation is correct, or even accurate, but I will try my best to remain fair to both sides of the argument as I feel it’s important for people to start looking at all sides of an issue, not just their side.

I would highly recommend that you watch the entire hearing and LISTEN to both sides. What are their arguments? What are their proposals? What is the evidence to back up their claims? Are they speaking factually or emotionally? However, I get it. It’s dry and it’s four hours long. So I watched it so you didn’t have to.

All. Four. Hours. Of. It. (Not all at once – took me two days to get through it all).

You’re welcome. 🙂

But again, this is my interpretation and you can’t assume my interpretation, or opinion, is the same as yours. Again, I would encourage you to watch it and form your own opinion.

I think we as American citizens need to start training our brains to LISTEN to all sides of an issue so that we have all the information we need to form our own opinions. That way, we are making decisions, moving forward, based on facts and intentions, not emotion. Emotions are fleeting, facts are forever. It’s time to recognize and acknowledge that fact.

That is the goal of our podcast, as well.

Let’s get started:

Senator Graham – I appreciated his comments. He strove to be fair to Facebook and Twitter by explaining that their platforms have been good, overall. That they have served to bring people together and give them a platform to voice their opinions, thoughts, goals, etc. However, it appears they have gotten out of control, whether intentionally or not, and that they do not have the right to censor what groups of people can, and can not say. This applies to both sides, not just one side. They do not have the right to censor the left, they do not have the right to censor the right. And whether their intentions to do so is unclear. It might simply be they struggled to control something too massive to control. And this is where the hearing comes into play. It’s time to call a halt to the “fact checking” and “false claims” and silence groups of people that dare to disagree with the platforms goals, thoughts, agendas, or special interests groups that donate large sums of cash to the platforms. Senator Graham is hoping that this hearing will modify business practices so that decisions moving forward are transparent and fair to all points of view.

Senator Blumenthal – He opens his turn by cautioning the American people about the dangers of President Trump using social media by posting lies and incendiary rhetoric. I sort of agree with this. There have been time when President Trump has tweeted something and I actually cringe in response. Though I understand the message he’s trying to convey, the way he says it is off putting and awkward. And in a world where people do not bother to read between the lines but take everything at face value, it’s counterproductive. However, the reason he even posts on Twitter is because he can’t trust the MSM (Main stream media) to accurately report what he’s saying. They take snippets from what he’s saying and thread them together to make it sound like something completely different. They routinely cut him off and do not allow him to fully flesh out his thoughts before jumping in to “argue” with him and “fact check” him when that is not the duty of the press. They exist to provide a platform to the American people and to report on the news, not opine their biases. Sure. they can offer opinions and predictions, i.e. talking points, but to not allow the full message to get to the American people is disingenuous and dishonest. Senator Blumenthal acknowledges that, after getting his hatred for Trump out of the way, that Twitter and Facebook have become too big and something must be done with the power they find themselves wielding. He also points out that Google is absent from the hearing, “they were given a pass and rewarded for their timidity.” Ah, but then he goes on to say that what they are doing is not censorship but it’s their “moral and civic responsibility” to stop the flow of hate. No sir, I disagree. That is NOT Twitter and Facebook’s responsibility. That is the responsibility of the user to block or delete that rhetoric. It’s hateful and vile but the authors of that have just as much right to post it as I do posting this blog post. And that’s the fundamental difference between the left and the right.

Dorsey and Zuckerberg’s opening statements – Dorsey’s was decent. He expressed what I think was a genuine desire to do the right thing. He struck me as a man who is over his head and is floundering trying to figure out how to please everyone.

Zuckerberg, however, fairly admitted that they took actions to suppress “hateful” groups and praised their efforts and decisions. He even went so far as to say “this is what people expect from us.” He went on to tout their efforts to promote registering to vote and to provide information for people to learn more about various political races around the country. I would be interested in knowing how that information provided was divided – was there more democrat links than republican? I suppose it doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things, but it’s something to consider. Then he basically tooted his own horn to say that he and his wife donated large sums of money to political candidates to “ensure they had the political platform needed for their campaign.” Again, great for you. But what does that have to do with Facebook’s platform? Nothing. It was said to imply “gee, look at me guys. I’m actually a good guy. I give back so don’t be too hard on me.” He goes on to agree that we should update Internet regulations such as privacy, content, data portability. But then he goes on to say, “who should be responsible for what people say online?” That is where he lost me. It’s not YOUR job, Zuckerberg, or your platforms job, to decide what may, or may not be said online. I get there are certain topics and situations that that might be warranted, calls to violence, child sexual exploitations and other heinous topics, but it is NOT the platforms job to decide on what normal Janes and Joes say or the opinions they express.

Blumenthal then asks both Dorsey and Zuckerberg to do MORE to “fact check” and “disallow” false information for the special election in Georgia that could decide on the majority party depending on results. In his opinion, they need to do MORE. Well of course he would say that because Facebook and Twitter were so successful at suppressing opposing views for the presidential election, he would want them to continue doing what they are doing to try and suppress information from Georgia voters. How disgusting that he’s openly calling for MORE dishonesty, but let’s face it, is anyone surprised by this? I guess I’m more disappointed than anything else.

Senator Cornyn – The Internet has outgrown section 230 and he’s relieved to hear Dorsey and Zuckerberg are willing to discuss ways to improve it. Some committee members have proposed a private right of action so that individuals have the ability to sue the companies for suppressing their opinions. Though I’m all for giving individuals rights to protect their speech and the companies need some accountability, I fear allowing individuals to sue would be counter productive. I could see people posting speech they do not necessarily agree to all in order to sue the companies and make some quick dough. I’m not saying it would be EASY to sue the companies over any little thing, but it would open an avenue for constant litigation. It’s hard to classify Twitter and Facebook’s business model as they don’t really fall into a clear-cut category. He feels they should allow more speech and not less as more speech leads to more conversations and information. I would agree with this. The more information you have, the better you can make an informed decision. It would soon become apparent who spouts nonsense and who spouts thoughtful opinions but again, it would be up to the user to weed out that information and make his/her own decision on something. It’s not the right of Twitter or Facebook to make that decision for us.

Senator Feinstein – She asks show soon after the tweet goes online does Twitter label, or “fact check” the tweet? I’m not sure why she is interested in the time frame of this. What difference does that make? The point is, they ARE being labeled and the fact that they are being labeled at all is the point of this hearing. However, to be completely fair to Dorsey and Twitter, I understand why they would feel compelled to label these tweets providing a link to more information. They want to give people an opportunity to learn more about the situation themselves as opposed to taking someone’s word for it. However, who decides where to send these people who are seeking more information? And are they being directed to impartial news or to a pre-determined news source that only serves to further a specific agenda? Feinstein is concerned that opposing viewpoints will “stir people up,” which in essence implies that she does not want people to be given information that will potentially make them think something other than what her party wants them to think. She wants to control what information is given so they are ensured to get the response of want. I find that highly objectionable because it implies that want people to only be given the information they want to provide. How insulting to thinking people of any party. Feinstein’s bottom line – she wants the tech companies to do MORE. I wonder if she would feel that way if the tech companies were favoring Republican comments and “fact checking” the Democrat comments. I’m betting no. A “Stop the Steal” movement cropped up on Facebook shortly after the media declared Joe Biden the winner. Feinstein is concerned that this movement provoked violence because some members of this movement showed up to rallies armed with guns. Senator Feinstein, gun protection is still legal in this country, no matter how much you wished it weren’t so they have a right to carry and bear arms (provided they have the correct documentation). Also, they likely showed up to these rallies not to provoke violence because have there been any examples of people rioting, looting or burning anything down since the media crowned themselves kings and queens and announced Biden the winner even though it’s not official yet, but to protect themselves against the BLM movement that has repeatedly been showcased to attack Trump providers. The fact that this movement exists to begin with, and that thousands of people agreed and joined this movement irks Senator Feinstein because again, they are not playing by the rules of THEIR game.

Senator Lee – He provides examples of “hateful” tweets that caused the account to be suspended to Dorsey to ask him exactly how it was hateful. Dorsey admitted the tweet in question was flagged in error and that the account should not have been suspended. However, to be fair to Dorsey, he’s not personally responsible for his program or algorithms. However, it does serve to showcase what is wrong with the algorithms and to correct their computations. Senator Lee points out that those these “mistakes” are eventually caught and he appreciates Dorsey and Zuckerberg acknowledging these mistakes, it’s a fact that 93% of Facebook staff donated to Democrat candidates and 99% of Twitter staff donated to Democrat candidates so it warrants a closer look at these “mistakes” since most of these “mistakes” happen primarily against Republican voters and ads that dare to implicate Democrats of any wrong doing. Seems like a pretty big “coincidence.” Senator Lee requested a list of people that have had their content removed or accounts that have been suspended sent to him for review. Of course, he’s trying to prove that the majority of accounts that have been compromised comprise mainly of right-leaning voters. I’d like to know what those lists look like, too. He also pointed out one of his own posts on Facebook getting flagged and he talks about how that may be construed as false information in Palo Alto, which is where Facebook headquarters is located, I presume, but it’s not false information to the rest of America. He is implying that Facebook operates within their own bubble of self interest and really has no interest in anything outside their bubble of self awareness. He states he’s finding it harder to believe that these “mistakes” and imperfect algorithms not not intentional.

Senator Leahy – As expected, he calls on Twitter and Facebook to do a better job of censoring “hateful” and misleading information. Again, I’m quite confident he would not have this opinion if the information that was being censored was mostly Democrat-related issues. He claims that President Trump is the leader in giving false information. I would like some examples of this, please. What exactly has he said that was patently false or misleading? Does he come across as egotistical and an ass sometimes? Yes, yes he does. But what information has he given to the American people that has been false? They, the left, has said, over and over again that he continues to do this and has done this throughout his presidency and yet, no one can give any specific examples. I think that is where we, as the people, need to start holding feet to the fire and demanding they start providing specific examples of these claims instead of blindly accepting their “truth” about this. He brings up the claims that Trump makes about the election being rigged and that there is election fraud. What do you think these hundreds of sworn affidavits that people have submitted and initial investigation into the Dominion software used in many states country-wide that have shown discrepancies is about?? The fact that we even HAVE these questions should be the bare minimum reason to investigate. I would have this same opinion if Biden made these claims. Because this goes way beyond this election, it sets a precedent for upcoming elections as well. We MUST investigate these claims if we hope to have any kind of fair election in the future. Because if these claims are true and we continue down the path we’re on now, the voter is deemed obsolete. Why vote when the flawed system will provide the candidate of the crooked party time and time again? So. Trump’s claims may be upsetting to many who don’t want him in the office four more years, but again, it’s not all about YOU. It’s about a fair election that the PEOPLE choose. He brings up calls to behead Dr. Fauci and the director for the FBI. Yes. That’s disturbing and that hateful rhetoric has no place on these platforms. And I will go on to say that allowing Madonna to post that she wants to blow up the White House and to allow Kathy Griffith to post a picture of herself holding up a bloody, severed head of President Trump should not be allowed either. Again, these rules need to be applied ACROSS THE SPECTRUM. Not just to one particular party. He brings up a good point – though these platforms are successful in taking down hateful content, the user just goes and makes new accounts. I don’t know what the platforms have any control over this and I’m sure that stuff happens all the time and becomes a full-time job for someone to monitor. But that kind of thing is the small price we pay to retain our freedoms of speech. He says that this hateful rhetoric results in “systematic genocides’.” Really. That’s a pretty hefty and serious claim. What are you examples, sir?

Senator Cruz – He calls senate Democrats out for wanting more. This is a dangerous road to travel if we want to maintain a free democracy and free speech. Twitter and Facebook “exercises massive power while also enjoys massive corporate welfare through effect of section 230 with special immunity.” He goes on to ask the owners if their corporation is a publisher. He grilled Dorsey asking him if his company is acting like a publisher if they are deleting and editing content. He goes on to use an example of an account that was locked. Dorsey said their account wasn’t suspended and once the “offending” tweet was deleted, they got their account back. “Once we have silenced you, you may allowed to resume to speak.” This is such a dangerous road to travel. He calls Dorsey to commit, in writing, a list of all of the Republican candidates and support teams how many times they have been blocked or labeled on the platform. After all, Dorsey claims to want to “embrace transparency” so now would be a good time to put his money where his mouth is. Dorsey speaks about committing to looking at the “broader” picture, in essence, he answers no. Zuckerberg says yes, he will see if he has that data. In other words, gentleman, proof is in the pudding. I appreciate Senator Cruz asking for hard proof that the platforms have been biased to Republican candidates and issues and if he actually gets this data, I think it will add credibility to the censorship claims. We’ll see how serious these companies are about “transparency.”

Senator Durbin –   He starts off his time by softly chastising the people who called the committee stating that their time would be better spent on COVID, the re-counts and other various topics – spending time on “alleged” censorship is a waste of time. Well of course he would think that, because they are not censoring HIM. He talks about Facebook taking down hate speech groups, such as white supremist. I agree. There is no place, on any platform for hate speech groups, period. However, I would also like to point out, this same rule applies to Antifa and BLM, both groups that have increasingly become more and more violent and tout hateful speech as well. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Again. Be fair to ALL groups, Senator Durbin.

Senator Sasse – He brought up a good point, he’s not sure why Republicans are so eager to re-write section 230 knowing that there is a good possibility that the incoming party will be the ones writing the new rules and that the other side seems almost giddy at the prospect of yet another government entity overseeing these public platforms. He states he’s not sure government should be involved in this process for privately owned companies. Even though these privately-owned companies are massive and have such a far-reaching audience. He also brought up the fact that since such large percentages of these companies’ employees are Democrat supporters, do the owners of these companies think their “fact checkers” can be an impartial judge and jury when deciding on whether the information in question should be allowed to remain. Zuckerberg responded with an acknowledgement of this potential bias and stated they could do better on making sure they are more diverse in their hiring practices, but Facebook employees are across the world and he feels that alone is enough diversity to offset any potential biases. Dorsey responded with, they don’t really have people that make these decisions but rather it’s the algorithms that do the job and they can do a better job of making sure the algorithms are more precise and accurate.

Continue reading “Censorship is Good, as Long as You’re Not Censoring Me”

Politics

Unity Does Not Mean Submitting to Group Think

Do you think we’re beyond uniting? Have we reached a time where it’s impossible to come together and work toward common goals?

Sadly, yes, I think we are beyond that point.

Why do I think this? Because we can’t even agree on fundamental things. For example: We can not agree on what a freedom and a right is. We can not agree on the fundamental values of life, let alone the details on how to ultimately achieve that goal.

And if unity means asking people who have different values or opinions from your own to sacrifice their convictions and beliefs, then no, I’m not interested in unity.

Unity, Mr. Biden, does not mean I succumb to your agenda. Unity does not mean accepting and abiding by your group think. That is not unity, that is being a dictator. And history has shown nothing good comes from that type of leadership.

So if unity is not possible, and I don’t believe it is, does this mean we will forever endure the violence, the hateful language, the name calling and the overall hate pit that our country has fallen into?

Not necessarily. I believe it’s possible to peacefully coexist but some things must be done first before that can happen.

And it won’t happen overnight and it certainly won’t happen because the party calling for unity is allegedly in charge. We should strive to peacefully coexist regardless of which party holds the executive (olive) branch.

Justin Haskins, from his opinion piece on The Hill, has this suggestion:

“Biden has repeatedly claimed, as he did during an address on Saturday, that he will “serve as a president who seeks not to divide, but unify, who doesn’t see red states or blue states, but only the United States.”

Forgive me for being a little skeptical. Biden has done little in his career to show that he is interested in bringing the country together or addressing the concerns of “red states.” In fact, during the 2020 campaign, he spent far more time trying to alleviate the worries of the socialist wing of his party than reaching out to conservatives and Americans in “flyover country,” who mostly rejected Biden on Election Day.

Biden didn’t try very hard to bring the country together during the presidential campaign. But let’s assume he sincerely wants to bring the country together. How can he go about doing that?

The only way Biden can restore a sense of national unity and alleviate the legitimate fears of conservatives, libertarians and others that a Biden-Harris administration will try to expand the power of the national government and limit individual rights is to finally put an end to the century-long strategy of attempting to force a single party’s will over a vast and diverse nation.

There is a solution, though, one that would garner support from people of all political persuasions. Instead of trying to pass gargantuan, partisan laws in Washington, D.C., that at least half the country will hate, Biden should pursue an agenda that grants to each state the ability to chart its own course. This could be done by only supporting legislation that block grants most federal funding to states, so that each can decide how best to craft policies that will fit the desires and needs of its residents.

So, for example, instead of trying to fix the health care system by imposing a “public option” and some expanded version of ObamaCare, Biden should back legislation that would allow states to create their own policies.

By giving states the ability to make their own policy decisions, everyone can win. Under such a system, not only would public policies more closely align with the desires of the entire electorate. It would also give the country an opportunity to see which policy ideas work and which fail. States could then learn from the mistakes and achievements of their neighbors and continuously improve public policy.”

I see where Mr. Haskins is coming from here – it’s a hybrid approach – leave it up to the federal government to iron out Bill of Rights and Constitution issues but give individual, area-specific policies to the states to figure out but it will never work. Biden, and the Democrat party are not interested in giving up power, they want it all. They want to dictate every aspect of our lives. They want to be able to tell you where to work, how much money you are allowed to make, how much money you are allowed to keep, what doctor you may, or may not, see, what car you can drive, and how much money you are required to pay them simply by “owning” your home. They want to have a thumb on every part of your life and if you’re okay with that, if you are willing to forfeit your individual freedoms to allow an entity to dictate your life and essentially “take care of you”, (though they really aren’t – they are controlling you through tax breaks, incentive programs, tax refunds that aren’t really refunds but a program that legally STEALS your money from you and then they grants you permission to get some of that back every year – but only if you didn’t strive to be successful or break any of their restrictive rules), well, I guess you have the freedom to live like that.

But that doesn’t mean everyone has that same desire. In fact, there is a large part of the population, pretty much half if the election results are any indication, that vehemently disagree with that premise. I’m one of those people. I work very hard for my money and I believe I should have the right to keep what I make. I want freedoms to CHOOSE from various options what is best for me and my family. I prefer to be left alone so that I can live my life. If I make a wrong choice, then I will deal with the consequences. I don’t need, nor want, an entity to “take care of me.” I’m perfectly capable of doing that myself, thank you very much.

And just because we disagree on how we want to live our lives, does mean my way, or your way, is better overall, it just means it’s better for ME as an individual. We are not a collective. We are individuals and a one size does not fit all solutions, which is what the Democrats strive to achieve every time they are in office, is not effective, is repulsive, dangerous and quite frankly, insulting.

I have a brain, I am not afraid to use it. I do not need an entity to guide me through life. I will make my own choices and I will learn from failures and I will celebrate my successes. If I choose to share my hard-earned successes with those less fortunate, then I will do so, but it’s wrong to MAKE me re-distribute what I’ve worked very hard for to someone who has chosen not to try as hard. It’s unfair and wrong. This does not mean I’m not willing to give to charities and help people, far from it, I just believe in hand ups, not hand outs. I believe consistently giving people hand outs is demoralizing and insulting, not to mention, it promotes dependency. How can someone take pride in their life if they are never given an opportunity to succeed on his/her own?

From the article Unifying Our Country on Psychology Today:

“What is constantly being demonstrated is that it is much easier to divide than it is to unite. It is possible, however, to unite our country through the systematic implementation of positive interdependence. Interdependence exists when two or more people (or entities) depend on each other so that their outcomes and fate are correlated. Morton Deutsch, in the late 1940s, noted that there are two types of interdependence, positive and negative. Positive interdependence is the perception that a person depends on others in a way so that he or she cannot succeed unless the other persons do and vice versa. Negative interdependence is the opposite; if a person succeeds, all others fail. In order for a democracy to function, citizens must perceive positive interdependence among all citizens. Societal members have to know that they “sink or swim together.”

Today, many Americans seem to have lost the sense of positive interdependence among citizens. Many of our politicians are more concerned about dividing citizens and creating animosity among them than uniting them. In order to unify our country, widespread positive interdependence must be reestablished and reemphasized. There are a number of ways to structure positive interdependence among citizens of our country.”

The author suggests the following things:

  1. Unite the country by establishing compelling goals that all members of our society willingly commit themselves to achieve. Positive goal interdependence exists when citizens commit themselves to mutual goals that are compelling enough to ensure that all citizens will work together to achieve them.
  2. The country may be united through establishing a national identity as an “American” that binds all citizens together.  An identity is a consistent set of attitudes that defines “who you are.”  Identity interdependence may be created by establishing a mutual identity through group symbols such as a pledge of allegiance, flag, or national anthem.
  3. Resource interdependence exists when citizens realize that in order to achieve their goals they must depend on the resources of others. Building a national economy, ensuring all citizens have the ability to communicate with each other, traveling from one part of the country to another are all examples of goals that require the resources and contributions of many citizens to achieve them.
  4. Citizens may be united through perceiving that they all receive the same rewards and benefits when national goals are achieved (i.e., reward interdependence).” (example: celebrating national holidays, receiving stimulus checks during a pandemic, tax cuts. We all benefit from a common goal – my words).

You can read the article for the rest of the points.

“In summary, if leaders and citizens wish to unite the citizens of our country, they must establish competing joint goals, a mutual identity, awareness of dependence on each other’s resources, awareness that one is rewarded only when all are rewarded, divisions of labor involving all citizens, giving citizens complementary roles, and encouraging all citizens to participate in the processes of democracy. It is through ensuring such positive interdependence exists that citizens can become aware of their unity.”

Again, lofty goals. And when those circumstances occur, I think it has the potential of uniting people but I think in order for these things to occur, the leaders in charge have to want it to happen – I don’t believe most of our leaders are interested in unity. They are more concerned with dividing us because if we are divided, then they have a platform in which to swoop in and “save” us. It is not in their best interest to unite us – chaos and fear leads to control, which is the ultimate goal of many politicians.

Be honest.

So where does that leave us?

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, and again, and again – I believe it all starts with communication and adjusting how we use language. There is no “us” or “them” or “those people.” That automatically puts us in different corners. That implies we are starting out as divided and many times people will not be open to listen to anything outside their opinions or beliefs. We need to start saying “us, “we”, “Americans”, “humans”. What is the purpose of bringing up color? Or sexual preference? Or race? When we label people and put them in a box they are automatically ostracized. We immediately feel superior to “those people.”

We have to accept the fact that the media is all about agendas and further dividing us. They epitomize groupthink. Don’t believe me?

It’s the same message, over and over and over again. And not just in print, but on news stations. There is very little independent thought. They all regurgitate one another – groupthink. We are repeating this same message because we want to brainwash you into thinking this is the ONLY way to feel about something.

And sadly, it works on a large portion of the people. Because if you read/watch people who feel differently than you, they nearly always spout off “these talking points.” And that’s it. If you dare to ask questions or ask for examples, it’s like groupthink people’s brains short circuit and they call on emotion and anger to call you names or do anything really to distract you from the fact they don’t really know what they’re talking about – they only know what they’ve been told. Nine times out of ten, they don’t even know why they believe what they believe.

If we ever hope to unite as a country, outside a catastrophic event like 911 or this overblown pandemic (because let’s face it, when the pandemic first started and we didn’t know what it was, we all united for a brief moment), people will have to learn to communicate with one another more effectively. Which means, LISTEN. Practice EMPTAHY for one another. It’s not all about you. It’s not all about me. We all have individual needs and desires, RESPECT that difference. Be WILLING to listen to possible solutions and then COMPROMISE on a mutual solution.

Again. It’s not my way or the highway.

And our officials in charge HAVE to, HAVE TO, call for an end to the violence. It’s NOT OKAY to attack someone in the street because he/she believes differently than you. It’ NOT OKAY to paint a group of people as racists when there is very little evidence to back up that claim. Officials HAVE to start condemning these actions and show “their” people that their behavior is not acceptable. If Biden is truly interested in uniting us, then he has to recognize that BLM’s activities are wrong and not acceptable. By NOT condemning their actions, it only serves to embolden them to push their violence just that much more.

The bottom line – IT’S OKAY TO HAVE DIFFERING OPINIONS. Just because I think a certain way, you think a certain way, doesn’t mean it’s the ONLY way to think or tackle a problem. It’s NEVER okay to belittle, or attack, either physically or verbally, someone else for his/her opinion. Have the maturity to stop, listen and learn. I’m betting the person who has a different opinion than you presents an aspect of the topic that you may have never taken into consideration before. And there is always more than one way to tackle any problem or issue – THAT, my friends, is DIVERSITY – Different opinions and different approaches to the same problem.

If you made it to the end of this post and you know you think/feel differently than I do, congratulations. You have taken the first step to unifying this nation – you dared to listen to a differing opinion without losing your temper or becoming violet.

Who knows who will really win this election, but if the new president is truly interested in uniting people, then it’s time to start making people accountable for their behavior.

By the way, I stumbled on an interesting website, it’s called Unify America. And you can actually get paired up with someone who thinks differently than you do and talk to them as a human being and see if you can agree to disagree. I think it’s an excellent tool to not only practice interacting with someone who thinks/feels differently than you do, but also serves to show others that it CAN be done. Check it out. (Not sponsored).