Before Benghazi became the media hit sensation, there was Gosnell. Then came the IRS scandal. Then came a myriad other “leaked” informations. If you’re the one who can sew all of these seemingly unrelated pieces of fabric together into a coherent narrative of what we’re now facing, now might be a good time to come forward and start demonstrating your craft.
Logging on after lazily watching a movie on the couch, to see all of the same old political pitchforks and torches, I realise maybe wasting the afternoon on the couch isn’t such a waste of time after all.
So, I watched this movie, Easy A. Before I review what others have said, (I already peeked, and it’ll colour my thinking, so let’s get this out first), l’ll have to say, at first I was a little like “what is wrong with the world?”, as people tend to do when we get older and look disapprovingly at youth culture. The movie had a couple hot girls in it, so it was easy on the eyes, and it actually had a lot to say about high school gossip in the digital age, which I found a little bit worthy of discussion. The actress is charming, conveying a sort of disaffection with expressions. So I liked the movie. Was a little uncomfortable with the gay student running off with a gay lover subplot, which seems to be a union requirement to include in everything in Hollywood movies these days. I mean, really. The kid drops out of school to run off with his gay lover, and Hollywood seems to want us to be okay with that? Sorry, I’m not. Whatever. I’ll have to admit, the ending of the movie was a little bit of a letdown, like they just ran out of ideas, and so, let’s end this just like a classic movie that everyone will remember. Or something.
But, anyway, there’s lots of topics for discussion in the movie, so I just thought I’d do something different and scribble down a few thoughts. What the hell, right?
At some point, I’ll have to address what I see as the problem with Christians in the conservative movement, of which I can’t fully claim part of, as many conservatives block me, presumably due to my propensity to say impolitic things. I like a lot of the benefits of living in a somewhat Christian society, so don’t take this as Christian-bashing. But we need to look at how Christians affect politics for the rest of us who might otherwise be considered Conservatives, if not for our impolitic way of speech.
Let’s start with birth control. The minute Sandra Fluke became the poster child for government sponsored birth control, the discussion immediately switched to “religious exemption”. Hey, I’m not religious. I don’t feel I should be forced to subsidize other people’s sex lives any more than the most devout Christian. Too late. The argument became about religious prudes, and was promptly squashed by a left that hates nothing more, seemingly, than anything to do with Christians. Christians became leverage to the left in shaping the argument. And we all will pay the price for it.
I should expound on this, some day, when I feel more up to it, should I be granted said time. Hate what the IRS did to Tea Party? Keep in mind, I myself feel like Planned Parenthood shouldn’t be receiving one red dime from the federal government out of my taxes. In a Conservative Utopia, Conservatives would go after leftists taking advantage of the tax code with an equal amount of fervor. Come on, you know you would.
Once an issue gets defined by Christians, the issue is lost. Want another example? I don’t condone persecution of muslims, but I’ve got my head out of the sand enough to realise, they’ll take advantage of any and all exemptions we grant Christians to spread their kind into our public life. What seems insidious to you, they find the same insidious in you. Another time, maybe I’ll get around to discussing why I think one is more insidious. My point is: What you argue against one group, can and will be used against your groups, or groups you favour. You need to be smart about the law, and that is what we’re talking about here. They’re trying to make blasphemy laws part of United Nations and United States laws. You’d better be paying attention, or you could end up ruined by a government grown too powerful by your own use of it against other people.
To me, restricting immigration is how you control who has an influence in writing your laws. If you’re like me, you probably want as little room for error in radical islam infecting our daily lives. There’s a lot at stake, here. I’m not saying “round ‘em up, and put ‘em in detainee camps”, or “let’s burn all the mosques”. I’m saying treat the ones who are here with respect if they deserve it, but let’s keep their numbers low, if they are more about putting their way of life above adapting to ours. I don’t want to come across as xenophobic, but there’s already politicians suggesting blasphemy laws should be implemented in the United States. If ever something needed the kabosh, that’s it. The free world depends on it.
Someone needs to sit down with Marco Rubio, and discuss what qualifies him to propose immigration legislation. Ask him about his views about immigration in Europe and across Asia. There are serious problems going on right now, worldwide, many directly related to immigration policy and refugees, and I’d like to know he has a grasp on the issues, rather is just seen as an expert because he might have political voter appeal to a particular demographic.
For the most part, I don’t care about the president’s silly look on a bicycle. Unless you’re out doing something in the way of physical fitness, I don’t think you have a lot to say about it on a personal level. In other words, personal attacks on him for looking like a book-learner trying to keep in shape seem a little petty to me.
On the other hand, and this is a much stronger hand, he seems deliberately projecting an image of, well, I don’t know what, but it isn’t that of a strong, masculine leader. I know masculinity is the devil in the eyes of leftists, but his imagery is really not very effective. We have Gary Johnson who climbs mountains, and manages to look cool riding a bike. We had Mitt Romney, who looked pretty comfortable on a horse. We had Bush and Reagan, both chainsaw-wielding Westerners.
It’s a bit humourous watching Obama trying to wield a mattock for an obvious garden photo-op, and once again, looking obviously unfamiliar with physical labour. And yet, he’s the one who the labour unions support?
From day one, Jimmy Carter made the best of his familiarity with swinging a hammer. When a lifetime academic talks about his support of the working people, the leftists could not have picked someone less credible.
Someone else brought up the topic, and I’ve been remembering something I forgot to update to the original post, and after seeing how long that one is, decided to just write a second part.
I’ll have to look up the link that discussed PTSD in Iraq vets serving as Police officers that led me to all of this, but the one biggest symptom that I most strongly identified with was overreaction to sudden stimuli. There are some days where I’m just a bundle of jumpy nerves, often aggravated, I’m sure by loading up on sugar-laden beers the night before, but the jumpy part, I’m pretty sure that’s there any way. Some days I have not quite panic attacks, but anxiety episodes. I first really started noticing this last summer when I was doing some work, including demolition work using a forklift with a co-worker. He’s the one who pointed it out, and after he did, I really became self-conscious of just how jumpy I am.
I over-react to the sound of a couple guys walking out in the parking lot behind the open warehouse bay door. I stick my head in the refrigerator at the grocery store, and jump when someone lets a door further down the aisle swing shut, (that one probably would’ve surprised most people). I overreact even when I recognise my friend’s footsteps coming up to the open front door. I have a very strange, high strung thing going on in my head. Even knowing that, it doesn’t really prevent it.
Now, as I alluded to earlier. I’ve learned that the actual anxiety episodes are at least partially related to diet, in my case, anyway. The anxiety isn’t quite the same as the jumpiness, although I’m sure they are relatable, or at least one aggravates the other. It’s the exaggerated reaction part, I think that distinguishes them. With the anxiety, it’s just a general, vague, yet intense feeling of impending danger, whereas with the overreaction thing is the actual response to something that actually happens.
Anyway, I figured I’d get that written down, as it’s been bugging me for about a year, once my co-worker pointed it out. Let me see if I can dig up the original link that prompted me writing about this.
This was one of the stories about an Iraq vet police officer that prompted me to write up about this.
Well, I give up for now, so here’s a webmd page, not as concise, nor worded in the way that I readily identified with when I first decided to write this.
The word’s been used a lot lately by tea partiers and in the news lately since that’s one of the words the IRS keyword searched to harass 501(c)4 applicants.
I’ve never felt comfortable calling myself that, and I’ve always felt a little embarrassed when someone refers to me by the word. I think history judges who is and who isn’t, and it seems a little pretentious (sorry, tea party, love ya, but I’ve gotta be honest).
So, over Memorial Day weekend, John McCain jetted over to Syria to meet with the folks trying to oust Bashar Assad. I suppose overthrowing a government requires guns and ammo.
I have a lot of misgivings about it all around. It looks to me like they’re trying to replace Assad’s government, with a hard core Islamic state, and I have more than just a little apprehension about Islam formalized in governments. In fact I think it’s something to be avoided. Turns out there’s some 7 Muslim Brotherhood advisors or something working on Obama’s administration. Totally bad idea, in my opinion. Islam needs to be kept out of government. Period.
So, let me back up a second. When the Boston Bombings happened, and it turned out to be radicalised jihadi Muslims, people warned of the dangers of backlash. We want to avoid what we did to the Japanese living in America during World War II, rounding ‘em up and putting them in internment camps. I wasn’t suggesting that, but I took the point: We shouldn’t mistreat entire minority groups. I get that. But I also think maybe we need to limit the number of Muslim-influenced people from immigrating here in the first place. Sounds racist, I know. But look at the kinds of problems that can be traced directly back to followers of Islam worldwide. There is a lot of material to build case studies from. That’s just a fact we can’t afford to ignore.
Back to the discrimination part of it. You know, there’s something I understand and like about both Christianity and Islam. If it wasn’t enough that I was a muslimophobe in the last paragraph, let me go ahead and be a sexist in this one. Devout religious women are generally virtuous. In a way, I think the purpose of religion in the first place is to provide guidelines and a somewhat organised social structure. I think that’s important. Proper roles of men and women. But, again, while this is a social structure that is probably at the heart of most modern societies, I think it largely needs to stay out of government and law. Yes, we should act this way or that way, but any religion that imposes a physical penalty on a spiritual “sin”, is no good in my book. Religion needs to be optional, not compulsory. And that is the danger of Islamic societies, from my viewpoint.
Anyway, it looks like we’re having another arms race, this time in Syria. I don’t like it one bit because of the company we’re forced to keep, but good luck with it, jihad John McCain. I might move to Arizona just to vote you out.