Depressing and Deadly

Perhaps you just concluded watching "The Five" on Fox News Channel co-hosted by the lovely Kimberly Guilfoyle, but a depressing and deadly accurate article by Greg Gutfeld now requires your eyeballs.

"How can America defeat ISIS if we have vocal factions believing that we are worse? How can we fight the enemy if a large portion of our population thinks an inanimate object – a gun – caused Orlando?"

Damn good question.

Gutfeld: Orlando’s doom. The most depressing article you will ever share. Share it anyway by Greg Gutfeld

We will do just that!

The immediate consequences from the Orlando terror attack are obvious: dozens dead and maimed – families changed forever. 

The next layer of consequences, arriving soon, are not as obvious, but they are coming. Here they are: 

We are getting a divorce. First, a poll shows that Americans are pretty much divided on their opinions about the attack. Most of the Democrats see it as a gun control issue. Most Republicans see it as a terror attack. And there seems to be no sign of compromise (why can’t it be mostly “terror” and a little “guns?” asks the therapist, Dr. Gutfeld) 

This poll hints at an ongoing, disturbing change in this country – one that brings forth a series of even more problems – those of which I see as almost unsolvable. We quarrel about the quarrel. We cannot agree on the fight. And therefore we cannot begin to fight. Instead, we are like that proverbial snake that devours its own tail. Except, we think it’s sushi. But it’s blowfish. You get the idea. We’re dead. 

"How can America defeat ISIS if we have vocal factions believing that we are worse? How can we fight the enemy if a large portion of our population thinks an inanimate object – a gun – caused Orlando?" 

We assume different identities lead to different values. Does a black person, or a gay person or a fat white male, see a terror attack differently? I wouldn’t think so, but activists, talking heads and assorted thought-processors disagree. Now we no longer look at a tragedy as an American one, but through the divisive eyes of balkanized camps of competing identities. 

An activist at the University of Missouri, during a vigil for the victims of Orlando, actually expressed disappointment that she had to speak in front of grievers, who happened by birth, to be white. My only relief comes from the fact that a few people heckled her (a brave gay couple). That relief left when others drowned them out. 

The beat-down is dead. We need to train our populace on the basics of group self-defense – meaning how to cooperate and risk their skins to take down the lone aggressor. 

If ten people attack a man with a gun, one or two may die – but the alternative is worse. “Be Like 93” should be the motto – in honor of the heroic actions of the passengers of Flight 93, who saved uncountable lives on September 11, 2001 by attacking the hijackers and bringing the jet down in a Pennsylvania field. 

But that’s not what I’m really talking about. I mean justifiable aggression: explicitly meting out justice to those who deserve it. How can we do that, when we cannot agree who deserves it? 

The New York Times blamed Republicans for Orlando. The Huffington Post blamed Christians. Every liberal blames guns, as well as the complicit wife of the murderous, terrorist dirtbag. And the dirtbag’s dad blames social networks. He’s even suing them. 

The more we spread the condemnations around, the less we have for the truly guilty party. Hence our incremental approach to ISIS. President Obama treats the war on “terror” (a polite phrase for Islamism), like we’re playing Jenga. Slowly, and on rainy days. 

We lose respect for evidence. Our inability to call a spade a spade is the result of divorcing cause from effect. If we can’t call Islamism out for this horribleness, then what’s left? Blame Guns. Christians. White Zinfindal. It’s as though you blame a massive wild fire not on dry tinder and a lit cigarette, but on poor self-esteem among carbon products. 

Here’s science: Islamism preaches the murder of gays; then an Islamist murders a club full of gays. Cause…effect. 

Why does the left deny science? 

The way the media and our White House deny the effects of Islamism seems eerily similar to a certain industry we grew to loathe over time. Remember how the tobacco companies denied the role of their product in lung cancer? To deny that link, now, would have you laughed off the planet. My prediction: 20 years from now we will feel the same way about Islamism. 

“Remember when we had a president who refused to admit the link between atrocity and Islamism” will be the same as “Remember when people used to say cigarettes didn’t cause cancer.” 

Refusing to link Islamism to evil is denying the evidence before your objective eyes. You don’t even need to bring up Orlando. Try honor killings. Read up on the Taliban and what they do to girls who want to go to school. Google “Taliban” and “acid.” 

President Obama isn’t just on the wrong side of history, he’s on the wrong side of the future. For a guy who claims to be all about science, he lives in a fairy tale. 

We have murdered sympathy. A product of modern leftism’s regressive identity politics: we see victimhood as a zero-sum game. If you grieve for the victims of terror, is there any left for Black Lives Matter? If you light a candle for Orlando, why not for Ferguson? 

If you aren’t gay, how are you able to sympathize with gay victims of terror? 

What if you’re against gay marriage? Are you as evil as terrorists? Perhaps, some might say (or have said).

One anchor at another network actually chided a sympathizing politician, in the state where the terror took place… because she did not support gay rights enough to his satisfaction. I was bummed he’d play bouncer to the “Who gets to grieve” night club. That’s beneath him. Obama was against gay marriage just a handful of years ago, my friend. 

Now sympathy is saddled with considerations for approval of other groups and classes. Maybe just keep quiet instead of expressing sympathy, one might conclude. 

We have killed debate. To better enhance well-being, one must be able to argue and even allow oneself to be proven wrong. Science is all about that: prove me wrong, please. Now, no one wants to be wrong, even when it’s an abstract debate. 

Look, I think the gun control debate is a deflection from the core concern, which is terror. But I’m willing to listen to some common sense, or at least informed opinions on how to prevent terrorists from getting guns. Sadly, the gun control argument is a misleading one: used not to ban guns (we know it ain’t happening), but to drive the debate away from the more volatile issue, which Islamism’s universal plans. 

And! – wouldn’t it be nice to talk about gun control with people who actually knew something about guns? Or control? If Orlando had been done not by gun, but by bomb -- where would the left’s argument be? Where it was, after Boston. Nowhere. 

We have disabled our impulse control. My motto has always been: your first public thought is often your worst public thought. Meaning: think before unloading. 

We now know that this is an impossible wish in this current climate of Twitter, Facebook and Piers Morgan. What happened to reserve? Contemplation? Thoughtfulness? What about waiting a few days before you spout an opinion? 

Now every celebrity and their less famous sibling is on Twitter lecturing us on “assault weapons” and “tolerance” as if the world right now really needs a hot take from a sitcom star on his third bout of chlamydia.

The strong and silent type has been replaced with the weak and loud. I’d include myself in this, except that I only speak when spoken to. Otherwise, I sit quietly in a corner and drink copious amounts of wine. 

We no longer cooperate. This sad and sober consequence is the result of combining all the results mentioned above together. Without cooperation, society is doomed. Cooperation contributes to better lives, over all. If what’s good for you, is good for them you help them get what you have. 

That’s not the case in this era of moral relativism. 

The problem is: we no longer believe that what we have is good. How can America defeat ISIS if we have vocal factions believing that we are worse? How can we fight the enemy if a large portion of our population thinks an inanimate object – a gun – caused Orlando? And not this pernicious ideology you can’t even call a death cult, because radical Islam is worse than that? It’s a death movement. A death phenomenon. It’s a force that sees our conscious lives as inferior to what happens after you die. Which is why, for them, killing gays is an act of love. They’re doing those sinners a favor – in their twisted skulls, killing innocents in a night club just gave the murdered a Fast Pass to Nirvana. 

Boy, this is a depressing article. And I wrote it. 

Read it and weep. For the victims. For the country. For your family. For you and me.

Bravo Greg Gutfeld!

Cooper Flew the Coop

In a despicable display of partisanship, Anderson Cooper flew the coop attacking Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi about her actions opposing gay marriage in Florida.

 

Cooper, who is highly regarded for his journalistic integrity among the media elites and even by some on the right, including firebrand conservative Glenn Beck, is being applauded by progressives, liberals and the LGBT community for his blindside of Bondi.

I have always considered Cooper among the very best of the national mainstream media, which can no doubt be considered strongly left leaning.  But I found his attack on Bondi nothing short of strongly offensive.

The LGBT community, which includes Cooper, is miffed with Bondi for her opposition of the legalization of gay marriage.  Bondi was acting on behalf of the state of Florida (I am a resident of the Sunshine State) in leading the opposition, as her job having been elected dictates. As she pointed out, the majority of the residents of Florida are against the measure, as am I.

That does not in any way suggest she, or any of the other Floridians against that initiative, hate the LGBT community. We do not.  We just happen to believe marriage is between a man and woman, as our Christian beliefs dictate.  Certainly, the greater majority are in favor of a civil union which would allow for loved ones to have legal standing, contrary to Copper's suggestion otherwise.

Incidentally, this is a position recently held by both President Obama and Hillary Clinton until it became politically expedient to change positions, with Clinton calling it a "sacred bond" and a "bedrock principle."



At any rate, as common sense would suggest, this was not an appropriate time to address this issue with AG Bondi. Unless your manners and professionalism took a back seat to your personal agenda.  They did with Cooper, and my respect for him immediately flew the coop.

Katie Hopkins had a brilliant piece over at The Daily Mail.

In a rather stunning speech Tuesday, a petulant Obama hunkered down in defense of Islam essentially blaming America for the grotesque loss of life in Orlando. Obama took a shot at Donald Trump, as did Hillary in a follow up speech.

But it is Trump who has accurately assessed the real issue, radical Islamic terrorists, and make no mistake, it is the left, led by these two anti-American elites, and their policies, that are in large measure to blame for this terrorism.

"Perhaps it is those who preach tolerance that we should be most afraid of. Democrats and liberals preach tolerance. But in doing so they have chosen to ignore the dark truths of a religion which is the most intolerant of all" noted Hopkins.

Agreed.

Cooper, and his progressive partners in the media, do not seem to have any anger whatsoever against radical Islam and the destruction that surrounds them. No, they take aim, with fervor, attacking opponents of the LGBT cause, which is dear to them.

The safety of the citizens of America, all of them, are dear to me.

If only Anderson Cooper would extend such efforts calling out those who are looking the other way as terrorists murder our citizens rather than taking this opportunity to advocate on behalf of the LGBT agenda.

Maybe he could have waited until we bury our neighbors categorized not as LGBT or Latino unless it is an agenda item for you, but as fellow Americans, before engaging AG Bondi?

Evil are these terrorists, not AG Bondi, and this was without question a terrorist attack on all of us.

When will the leftists ever learn.  As Hopkins accurately notes, they may never.

Progressives Use LGBT Movement to Control Citizenry

With ISIS running roughshod and terror in the air, and with an economy that looks fair with manipulated data but is incredibly fragile and on the brink of collapse, in recent weeks, issues surrounding those not heterosexual have dominated the news.  With age old common law and Christian values whipsawed from every angle, many of us feel we're climbing through the pages of Dr. Seuss's Inside Outside Upside Down.

There have been attacks on bakeries, who due to their religious  faith appropriately determined they would be unable to make a cake for a gay wedding.  A similar issue arose for a pizza parlor in the middle of nowhere that got attacked from all points across the globe. Quite a disturbance for such a limited amount of people.

Then, there is the sad tale of former Olympian champion Bruce Jenner, who has determined he is actually a woman and has begun making his transition, now referred to as Caitlyn.  I think he has major psychological issues, but I hope he finds peace.

These issues have not come to the forefront by accident.  Nobody was shocked the media was poised to promptly react as each of these issues became public knowledge.  Obama did not read about it in the news.

In fact, I deem the whole thing orchestrated.

I recall something I found interesting while watching the Celebrity Apprentice in 2012, noting that a disproportional amount of the charities designated by the contestants were associated with some arm of the LGBT movement. We posted here on BAHL Revere about this the time.

Vice President Joe Biden supposedly misspoke regarding Obama being a supporter of gay marriage, but that was not the case, simply presented that was to open the door for Obama, no doubt a man of principle, to change course once the wind changed direction allowing political expediency.  Same with Hillary Clinton, who for decades stood tall for marriage between a man and woman, citing it as a "bedrock principle".

These folks are liars.  They do not give a damn about gay people, although seemingly non-credible reports indicated both may be bisexual.  Both Obama and Clinton are using the LGBT movement, which again, represents approximately five percent of the population with a full stretch of the figures, to further their political ambitions.

And now, with the Supreme Court recently ruling in favor of same sex marriage, the slippery slope begins a frantic struggle for friction.

As famed economist and Hoover Institution Senior Fellow Thomas Sowell so eloquently stated recently stated in the supreme editorial pages of Investors Business Daily, "When any branch of government can exercise powers not authorized by either statutes or the Constitution, "we the people" are no longer free citizens but subjects, and our "public servants" are really our public masters. And America is no longer America. The freedom for which whole generations of Americans have fought and died is gradually but increasingly being taken away from us with smooth and slippery words".

The reasons for this embrace of the LGBT movement are plentiful; however, most notably,progressive activists in the United States want to use these kinds of laws to destroy free speech in America.  Hate speech is defined as speech that offends, threatens or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits. There you have it, if your religion finds homosexuality offensive, and you think that, you have no doubt offended somebody, and this day and age, that somebody could force your incarceration.

I'll go ahead an offend someone, as I believe marriage is between a man and a woman, with same sex couples free to seek civil unions, allowing them equal rights under the law but not necessarily in the church.

Moving forward now, all legal forms must be altered, and for students filling out forms it will move to parent name rather than the name of the mother and father, diminishing the value of the traditional family. If churches fail to embrace the LGBT crowd, from performing marriages to hiring staff, even if this goes against traditional beliefs of the church, the churches risk losing their tax exempt status. Calls for the stripping of the tax exempt status have already begun.

Christian churches are officially under attack now, and will be set up to be in violation; however, you will not see such effort being made at any mosques.  Islam is being championed; left alone, however, Christianity is deemed unworthy by these elites as traditional America must be discredited and destroyed for the new socialist utopia of one world governance to take root.

Hate speech can fly vigorously aimed at those who don't share admiration for the LGBT community, with labels of bigotry and racism tossed about with little ramification. Free speech will be punished in the court of public affairs if it is deemed inappropriate by the wizards of doublespeak. 

If you own a private company, you will be declared ineligible for consideration for government contracts or dealings with government agencies if you are deemed to profess discrimination against the gay community, or for that matter, illegal immigrants.

If it were only gay marriage, that might be one thing.

However, the issue is never the issue with the left, and the floodgates of rewriting common law and destroying valued traditions with escalating government control is running roughshod, issuing punitive damage to those who dissent.

The LGBT crowd are useful idiots, utilized as a political mechanism by the progressive movement to gain control over the citizenry.  With the help of a rogue Supreme Court who deems themselves able to operate outside of the Constitution, these doors have just been kicked wide open.  

GOP Lost Land of Lincoln

Although the GOP collected landslide victories in 2010 and 2014, the executive branch is slapping the legislative branch silly.  The country solidly believes we are on the wrong track, yet not only are the GOP feeble in stopping Obama, they are working with him. It is Animal Farm coming to life.

Immigration, Obamacare, TPP, gun control, gay marriage, Common Core, you name it, they have no strategy or leadership plan to diminish in scope, much less defeat, any of Obama's transformative ambitions.

I have not heard any real substantive push back while Obama falls over himself to foster a deal with the champion of dishonest nations, Iran, and have not read a credible GOP plan for stopping ISIS.

"In a single week we have seen the Congress surrender its legislative authority through fast-track, we have seen the Court rewrite the dictionary to protect Obamacare, and we have seen unelected judges rewrite the Constitution in order to impose the will of five on 300 million" said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R:AL.

It is beyond comprehension.  Nobody can be completely sold on the idea the GOP is this inept, so we are only left to conclude, that outside of perhaps about 25 of them, inclusive of Sen. Sessions, the GOP is quite comfortable with the wreckless, anti-American actions of our President.

The GOP has perished, with no more political battles pretend to lose while clandestinely supporting. The land of Lincoln, and the party perhaps our greatest president helped form, has been lost, defeated seemingly without a fight.

Moving forward, for whatever it is sadly worth, we will be ejecting from the broken system and voting accordingly.

Principles Put To Bed

Hillary Clinton is now a champion for gay marriage, but just a decade ago, she cited marriage between a man and a woman as a "bedrock principle".

     

Do you shift your bedrock principles often? Does Ms. Clinton have any principles, or is she a liar who seeks to gain political advantage by any means necessary?

Well, she is a Saul Alinsky gal, so I'll note the latter is confirmed.

Hopefully, America will not elect to our highest office an unprincipled individual, as "The most promising method of securing a virtuous and morally stable people is to elect virtuous leaders."