“Taradiddle”

“Taradiddle!” When that word popped up as my M-W Word of the day it happened to correspond with the frustration and growing anger I’ve been feeling about the current state of our nation’s political situation.

I don’t know exactly when I realized a very basic difference between the appeal of liberal political thought and the ideas behind conservative political thought. That difference has been described as the difference in emotion (liberal appeal) and logic (conservative reason).

When I listen to the statements and appeal of the liberal democrat party members of congress and their acolytes I’m left with a sense that what I have just heard is what is described in the definition of the word “taradiddle.” All too often they are stretching and distorting a partial truth into a “small lie,” a “fib”. Or, at best, in terms of an alternate definition of taradiddle “pretentious nonsense.”

Trying to get a liberal democrat to have a conversation on ideas, right and wrong, is nearly an exercise in frustration. The common response to that attempt is an immediate “let’s just agree to disagree.” There is in liberalism a fear of reason and logic. Regardless of the origin of a liberal’s adherence to the tenets of liberalism; one grew up in that environment and has never questioned or investigated the ideology; one sees people who have a degree of financial success, whether earned through hard work or inheritance, as winners in a perceived life lottery.

There is a fear of risk embodied in liberalism, and the vocal spokesmen for the liberal left capitalize on that fear by pushing the idea that the choices one makes in life are not responsible for their situation. Losing at life’s lottery is the reason for their situation. It doesn’t seem to make any difference what their situation is; it would always be better if it wasn’t for that evil life’s lottery.

Another cause for liberal “reason” is, in my opinion, a desire to be absolved of the idea embodied in Christs admonishment that it’s our individual responsibility to help those legitimately less fortunate individuals in society. The idea they seem to follow is that the government is more capable of determining who is deserving of help. Coupled with this is the notion that those with wealth are a stingy lot and it’s up to the government to see to it that they pay their fair share in helping the less fortunate. Frankly, my experience has been that liberals with money are the stingy ones. After all they pay taxes to help the poor so why should they contribute anything of what they have left to help the poor.

The result is now several generations, of educators and media filling “young skulls full of mush” with more “mush” about their lack of responsibility for their actions and the lack of responsibility for their individual situations. Liberalism is all about lack of an individual’s personal responsibility for whatever situation they find themselves in. In other words, liberalism is all about keeping people from growing up; becoming adults. Because if they do grow up and become adults they will never succumb to the notion that other people are better suited to controlling the direction and outcome of their lives.

So, here we are, “spoiled children” being told that their temper tantrums; marching in the streets, destroying other people’s property in the process, shouting down any and every point of view not their own; that these temper tantrums are excusable and justified. After all, they aren’t responsible for their behavior; someone else is.

When that behavior erupts into violence we have liberal leadership behaving in one of 2 ways: either silent acquiescence or outright encouragement of the kind exhibited by Representative Maxine Waters and others of her ilk. I cannot remember any circumstance where a conservative leader has ever encouraged the kind of physical violence that is being encouraged by liberals at all levels of leadership.

What liberals, due to their total lack of reason, do not realize is the backlash that will result if they are successful at depriving the hard-working people of this country their shot at a society where hard work is rewarded by financial security of their own making. What the liberals also fail to recognize is the backlash that will be forthcoming if they are successful at removing the president who was elected by those hardworking people who were sick and tired of liberal politicians deciding what the hardworking people could keep of their own money.

What liberals also fail to recognize is that people, like me, see them for who they really are; power hungry individuals who want to maintain or gain power by continuing the lie that hardworking people are responsible for the condition of those who, either do not want to achieve through their own efforts or through the efforts of others. Or, have come to believe that they will never achieve their life’s dreams so why try. Just accept the liberal mantra that it’s not their fault.

Just accept the liberal “taradiddle” and spend the rest of one’s life miserable.

What, you may ask, does this have to do with gender identity issues? Not much. I am a human being first. And I despair when I see my ideals and common sense disparaged and my dreams threatened by self-centered egotistical politicians and activists.

The Ignorance of Innocence

I am just not sure where to start, but I have to start somewhere so I will start with the laziness of parents; parents who have decided that their job is over as soon as the potty training is over. Entirely too many parents have totally turned the process of raising children who have a clear understanding of their rightful place in society along with basics required to achieve that end; such as accurate knowledge of our history. That fact has never been more on display than it was this past week in Washington DC and more than two hundred other cities across the country. The very idea that “children” should be the ones to tell responsible adults how to handle a subject as important as the right to bear arms is, on its face absurd beyond bounds, and dangerous at its core.

I’m not sure where the idea came from, but I can tell you that there is no legitimate comparison to saying that at the age of 17, young men and women are old enough to lay their lives on the line and don a military uniform are therefore old enough to tell adults what to do. In the first place, in the military at that age and experience level they are not telling anyone what to do. In the military they are being told what to do, how to do it and when to do it by people with far more age and experience. In the process they’re gaining a level of maturity and respect for authority that our school systems are doing a poor job of..

What we saw last weekend was a display of young people who were guided by pure emotion, which in some cases, I’m reasonably sure, were whipped to a frenzy by adults with less than honorable intentions.  Raw emotion has a great deal in common with the object of the frenzy … military weapons. Used for the right reasons and in the hands of someone with the right motives either can be a force for good. But, in the wrong hands and used with the wrong motives either can yield tragic results.

The fact that these “children,” and that is exactly what they are, have been so poorly educated about the history and reasoning embodied in our constitution, and in particular, behind the Second Amendment to our constitution is a worse than tragic reflection on the state of our education system.

When I was on the debate team as a junior in high school the national debate topic that year was about the advisability and necessity of our federal government providing funds for the education systems in the various states. I was young and not the most brilliant mind on our debate team, but in the course of studying the pros and cons of federal involvement in local education I did realize the dangers of a single central influence on the direction of the thought processes of “young skulls full of mush?

To my way of thinking it was a simple matter of math; the math of time. The math worked out like this. The average student spent at the most a half hour in the morning with his/her parents and in many cases barely an hour in the evening. In that brief time, what was being taught and/or learned? Probably not much in the way of how our government influenced our lives and the importance of guarding against ideas contrary to the personal desires of the parents.

On the other hand, children are under the influence and care of whatever school system they attend a minimum of 30 to as much as 40 hours a week. Socialists, liberals and progressives alike recognized this fact years ago and its why organizations like the NEA and teachers unions are so overwhelmingly influenced by ideologies in opposition to the basic Judeo-Christian principles of our founding documents. Is it any wonder then, that it was so easy to gin up the emotions of high school aged students across the country last week and convince them that it was the inanimate tool to blame and not the perpetrator or the people who raised him?

I have no statistics to back up my theory that the success of the Charter School initiative in most cases is the result of schools based on sound educational principles void of liberal dogma and experimental curriculums. Sadly, Charter Schools are not guaranteed continual existence. There are enough of them failing, to create a ground swell of concern for the lack of parental oversite of these schools. And that brings me back to my original premise that in the last 50 or so years parents have come to rely on schools to do the primary job of caring for their children.

So, I will beat the same drum I beat in a recent piece … Parents should be held responsible for the nature of the persons they turn loose on society. Until that happens organizations like the NEA and others with less than honorable intentions about the direction of our society, will control the direction of our society.

Where does the responsibility really lie?

It’s all a blame game. In the wake of the tragedy that unfolded in the halls and classrooms of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School two weeks ago we have witnessed the same rhetoric that has become the mantra again and again. It’s nothing but a blame game because no one has yet to actually get to the root cause of such horrific incidents … at least in my humble opinion.

The very first thing to be blamed, of course, is the instrument of destruction, the weapon; with the liberal left leading the way accompanied by some of the RINOs. The mere fact that so called intelligent, thoughtful people would immediately jump to the conclusion that an inanimate tool was to blame is absurd on it’s very face.

That is followed, naturally by the equally absurd idea that there is no reason for a common citizen to need such a destructive weapon. The notion that only the military should need such a weapon is fostered by the naïve idea that when our forefathers passed the second amendment to our constitution they were only thinking of securing the ability of the citizens to put meat on the table. While that was a consideration it was only a small consideration. A reading of the accompanying documents shows that the basis for that amendment was to forever create a fear in those who govern of the governed. That idea was totally new to mankind. Historically it had always been the governed who feared those who governed.

If weapons of the type used in Florida were banned, any individual determined to kill others would simply find another way to do it. The lesson of the Alfred P Murrah Building in Oklahoma City nearly 23 years ago should be required study for every politician, especially liberal democrats, and government bureaucrats. Timothy McVeigh didn’t need an AR-15. All he needed was a couple of hundred dollars’ worth of Ammonium Nitrate, a rented U-Haul and a cheap timer to kill 168 people, wound another 650 and damage all or parts of 300 buildings.

In light of that you would think that America’s farmers would have to find other sources of nitrogen to fertilize their crops but to my knowledge that is still readily available at any garden center or farm supply center in this country.

Even with all the fire power found in Stephen Paddocks room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel and Casino the number of people he killed or wounded pales in comparison to the destruction in Oklahoma City.

Have trucks or cars been banned after their use in the killing of innocent people in Europe? No, they haven’t. And while we’re at it let’s ban the use of all presser cookers. You remember don’t you, that pressure cookers were used in the Boston Marathon bombing a few years ago.

As history progressed so did the development of weapons and up until the invention of weapons like the AR-15 there was little concern with private ownership of certain weapons. I don’t know what was behind the reasoning for letting the ban on private ownership of the AR-15 expire, but it was the right thing to do in my opinion.

The citizens of our country should always have access to weaponry equivalent to the military. It is the only way to see to it that our government, people who serve in our government elected and unelected in particular, never have access to any means of overcoming the freedom of the governed. But that wouldn’t be an issue if the root cause of such tragedies was accurately identified.

The news is rife with politicians, celebrities, psychologists and pseudo-intellects blaming the inanimate weapon, people who own inanimate weapons, those who make inanimate weapons and society in general for the tragedy. But, not one of them has addressed the real root of the problem. True, background checks do help identify people who shouldn’t have access to guns, but that is like trying to stop a leak in a dam from the outside where the water has already breached the dam instead of on the inside where the leak begins.

So where is the inside of this dam? Not one person in any of these tragedies, with one exception that I know of, has placed the root blame where it really belongs.

I have always been a firm believer in the responsibility of parents to see to it that the children they bring in to the world are raised with a respect for the rights of other people and their own responsibility to conduct their affairs in a manner that does not interfere with the rights of other people. There is an old saying that goes like this: “Your right to swing your fist stops where my nose begins.”

When any parent fails in this responsibility to teach that concept to their children they bear equal responsibility for the acts of the children they turn loose on society. If an adult does such a lousy job of raising a child that the child becomes a blight on society and as we have seen in the recent events, a deadly blight, they are equally responsible for the acts of that child. It’s my firm belief that if the lives of the perpetrators of these tragedies were traced back far enough you will find an event, involving the parent directly or indirectly, which eventually led to the acts which ended in tragedy for the lives of other people.

That is the very seed of virtually every one of these tragic events and ignorant attention seeking persons of mediocre notoriety are racing to the microphones to blame the inanimate object or the NRA. Stupid corporate leaders are racing to the microphones to withdraw their support of the NRA. How shortsighted and ignorant can those executives be? Apparently extremely ignorant and shortsighted.

Once and for all … let’s get to the root of the problem. People who are ill equipped to raise responsible members of society and the society which chooses to turn a blind eye to them are the real root of the problem. Do I expect that to ever be addressed? No, I don’t.

We have created, at a minimum, two and possibly three generations of adults who have chosen to turn the responsibility for raising the children they bring into the world over to the school systems. Those systems are heavily staffed by teachers and administrators who are teaching our children that they bear no responsibility for their own actions. And that, I believe, is because those liberal educators don’t want to assume responsibility for the outcome of their own lives. They want society to take that responsibility off their shoulders.

Imagine a society that exacted the same penalty on the parents of children who harm others as the penalty imposed on the child. No doubt events such as we have just witnessed would be rare indeed.

Thank you Professor Jimmy and Crafton Hills College

Yesterday was another amazing day at Crafton Hills College in Yucaipa California. Thanks to Professor Jimmy Urbanovich, A.K.A. Speech Teach … I was once again given the opportunity to speak at Crafton Hills College. The reception was, as it has been in the past, even more gratifying than the time before.
 
My experiences with the students and faculty there have continued to add support to my observations about people. The biggest complaint I have had with the LGBT community in general is that they make little effort to reach out to the rest of society to explain what it’s like to be in their shoes. Rather they tend to demand blind acceptance from society and when they meet with resistance, react with even more demands and anger. 
I have found in experiences like the one at CHC, that when I simply share my experience with people as I did yesterday, without an accompanying demand for acceptance that acceptance is the natural outcome. People tend become defensive when demands are made of them, especially when the demand is acceptance of something alien to them or something that they have been led to believe is somehow unnatural or evil.
To further advance my own perspective, I was overwhelmed by the responses I received yesterday, when after my main presentation in the auditorium we adjourned to Professor Jimmy’s classroom for some give-and-take questioning and answering.
There were the usual unenthusiastic attendees who were there simply because their attendance was a class requirement. Those individuals I always seek to find a way to draw out and challenge in a positive way. It’s part of the fun of what I do, but the real reward is from people like one young man who told me afterward that he had not wanted to come, but that a friend had challenged him to show up. This morning I had a lengthy e-mail from him explaining that I had given him a whole new, although uncertain, perspective on his own life.
One young woman, who attended the initial presentation wasn’t even a student, but chose to come to the more intimate session in the classroom even though it meant being late for work. She approached me before the session began to tell me that she would have to leave for work shortly and didn’t want me to think she didn’t want to hear anymore of what I had to say. She was still there nearly 2 hours later and was the first one ask for a picture with me.
Another student, a young man with a very athletic build shared his experience with seeing and individual in his locker room whose appearance was confusing to say the least; looked far more female than male in most respects in body but still apparently male. His concern was that the situation made him feel terribly uncomfortable, which bothered him. He asked me if that was wrong. I explained that his reaction was normal and not to be confused with disgust. He was simply experiencing a natural reaction to a new and unexpected situation. If there was something in the individuals behavior that added to the discomfort it was perfectly appropriate to avoid interacting with them.
These are just three of the reactions I received yesterday and they all point to my original statement above. Simply sharing your own story without demanding acceptance, understanding or approval is a far more acceptable way to gain acceptance, understanding or approval. It’s a far more effective approach with a far more rewarding outcome.
The discussion eventually led to “The Bathroom Issue”. On that I have some rather definite opinions which I shared and which are in line with what I stated above. I think the edict that former president Obama issued regarding transgender bathroom use was much to the same point I made in the second paragraph of this entry. There was no effort made to help people understand and furthermore, by virtue of it’s broad and general nature, it was an open invitation to abuse by individuals with less than noble intentions. And again it was made without regard to different regional moral and ethical standards which is why I personally agree with President Trump’s order to rescind the previous order on the grounds that it is a state’s prerogative issue.
My thanks, once again to Professor Jimmy and Crafton Hills College for the opportunity to share my story and views.

YouTube video text “Why This “Tranny” is voting for Trump

I am Georgia Lee McGowen, Author, Designer and otherwise Jacqueline of all trades.

I am normal and I’m not what you might think of as normal.

I am a registered Republican … I’m an extremely conservative registered Republican.

I’m an extremely conservative registered Republican Christian.

I’m not supposed to be a registered Republican or an extremely conservative registered Republican Christian because of the part of me you might not think of as normal.

You see, I am also what the world labels a transsexual. In other words, I was born George but now I’m Georgia. That is supposed mean that I am a progressive liberal Democrat like the majority of the LGBT … Q community. But I’m not.

Why not?

Reason #1. I believe that government should be limited to providing a standing army to protect us from foreign entities that would seek to harm us. Beyond that, facilitating, not providing, means of communication and mobility should be the extent of our government. If that makes me sound like a libertarian … so be it, but I’m still a registered Republican.

Reason #2. The basis for the democrat party is a belief that only an all-powerful government is capable of making intelligent decisions affecting my life; that whatever wealth I should be able to accumulate in my lifetime through my own efforts or those of my family predecessors, is not mine to distribute as I see fit, but rather for an all-powerful Washington to use to buy votes.

Reason #3. I do not see the welfare and social programs of government, supported and advanced by the Democrat party, as having a Christian element. Christ didn’t say that we should give unto Caesar so that Caesar could distribute the wealth and care for the poor. It’s my opinion that Christians who support government expansion and welfare are doing so to absolve themselves of the responsibility placed on us by Christ, to aid the poor from our personal resources, which by the way, would be more than plentiful if we were only taxed to the extent outlined in Reason#1. From my Christian viewpoint I see government welfare as a way of forcing everyone to be Christian generous. And I don’t see Christ in that proposition at all.

Reason #4. Although I am not happy with a whole boat load of politicians who claim to be Republican (Rush calls them RINOs, Republicans In Name Only) I am pragmatic enough to realize that they are generally more inclined to support my view of the way things should be done than the views of the Democrat party. And further more I believe that with a real leader in the white house, RINOs are wishy washy enough to do what he wants, if for no other reason that self-preservation.

Those are my primary reasons for adhering to the Republican premise of restricted government. In closing, I want to address those “principled” conservatives who claim to stand on principle when they not only refuse to endorse or support our party’s nominee, they are downright mean and nasty about him. You know who you are, Lindsay Graham, Glenn Beck, Bush 41, Bush 43, Bush who wanted to be Bush 45, Mitt Romney, John Kasick … Go ahead and put your self-centered, egotistical principles ahead of your country’s future. Principles like that are not principles at all. They’re temper tantrums disguised as principles. Principles in this case means putting the national wellbeing ahead of your own petty notions of so called principles.

Donald Trump wasn’t my first choice either, and I chastised him publicly on Facebook for his temperamental and boorish behavior during the debates, but there is something far more important at stake in our country than my personal preferences. Our nations survival is literally at stake here. We didn’t go from an economic powerhouse with a military feared by the entire world which made it possible for us to go about our lives in sure safety, to the laughing stock of the world overnight. It has taken years of wrongheaded politicians, mostly democrats, but some republicans as well, voting the easy path to get us where we are today.

Mr. Trump isn’t a savior … but he is a safety brake on our national downhill plunge. He is the only thing between a free nation of laws and a nation of whimsical supreme court justice appointees who make decisions based on personal ideologies, while ignoring the very intent of our founders when they established our constitutional rights. For that one reason alone we cannot afford 4 to 8 years of Hillary Clinton. No nation is any stronger than the foundation on which it is built.

The foundation of our country is our constitution. The supreme court is the final arbiter of disagreements between parties, and the intent of our founders was that the outcome of those disagreements would be decided by 9 people, based on the facts, in light of the intent of the constitution as it pertained the disagreement. Decisions based on the personal preferences as to what a judge thinks the constitution should say or mean are destructive to the very fabric of our founding document.

I am not a genius. I am a person who relies on common sense applied to the right and wrong judgement of choices which I’m faced with each and every day. My common sense tells me that our nation is at a crossroads and the choice we as a people make next month will determine whether or not I, and others like me, will continue to have the freedom to live our lives as we feel God intended us to live them.

I have found most conservative Christians willing to listen when I explain the issues involved in leading my life the way I do. Progressive liberals on the other hand generally shut me down when the subject of politics comes up. Progressive liberalism though it tends to defend my community now, has no moral compass that assures me it will defend us in the future.

And … if Trump doesn’t work out, we can always revert to the slippery slope of progressive liberalism next election.

As I said in the beginning … “I’m not supposed to be a registered Republican … I’m not supposed to be an extremely conservative registered Republican Christian.” … But I am. And I’m voting for Mr. Trump.

I agree … to disagree!

Sometimes I just don’t know what to say or where to start when I do figure out what to say. So I think that I will, in football lingo, just backup ten yards and punt.

I have been silent the last two weeks because I have been preoccupied with politics and the machinations of our political parties. I never cease to be amazed by the stark differences and how they can be construed as being so similar. This past week and a half has brought home to me what Mom said to me when I asked her what the difference was between Republicans and Democrats. I’ve shared this statement recently, but I will share it again here for purposes of clarifying what I’m about to say.

Mom said, “Republicans believe that the individual is better suited to make decisions about their own lives than government and Democrats believe that government is better able to make those decisions for us.”

In the intervening years I have seen nothing to change that understanding, aside from the fact that at times, some Republicans tend to behave and vote more as if they are smarter and more capable of making decisions that affect my life than I am.

Cases in point: The last Republican president that I felt had a genuine concern for my self-determination was Ronald Reagan. When it came to George H. W. Bush, a.k.a “Bush 41”, while I thought he was a decent man with the courage to confront Saddam Hussein he lacked the courage and conviction to confront the enemy at home. I read his lips as well as his subsequent excuse for backing down from confrontation with Democrats over taxes.

In subsequent elections I voted for what I considered the lesser of two evils when I voted first for Bob Dole, then George W Bush, although I felt after the fact that he did turn out to be the right man for the time … internationally speaking, though not domestically.

I held my nose when I drew the line on my ballot indicating my choice of John McCain and then overcame a case of the vapors in order to do the same for Mitt Romney. In each case I clearly understood that the “establishment” was not adhering to Mom’s definition of a Republican. But, I also clearly understood that the ideology of the democrat party was not even close to my belief in my own right to self-determination. And that brings me to our current national dilemma and its relation to my personal identity.

In a recent blog post I share the reaction of a woman I met recently when I told her I was a Republican. She was aghast because in her experience the Republican party had shunned people like me, and to a degree she was right. But … she was right only in the sense that certain individuals within the party were extreme in their “hyper-conservative Christianity.”

In the years since I became involved in the community of people who, when lumped together are known as “LGBT – Q,” I have come to the conclusion that a majority of the misunderstandings the rest of our society have of us is due to the fact that, for the most part, the “community” does not make much of an effort to blend. Instead they tend to pursue a policy of separate but equal with special consideration for their personal identity. They make their sexual and/or gender identity the primary identity ahead of their humanity.

My gender identity has absolutely no more to do with my politics than the color of my eyes. Right is right and wrong is wrong, or in this case, the Right is correct and the Left is wrong … at least for me.

I am simply not willing to surrender any more of my freedoms for the lip service support of the Democrat party and its leadership.

I am simply not willing to overlook the dishonesty and corruption at the head of that column for the sake of using the bathroom of my choice.

I am simply not willing to overlook the fact that if all the promises made by Hillary and Bernie were kept that our nation would be bankrupt before the next election.

I am simply not willing to overlook the fact that well-meaning people whom I love have failed to live up to their personal promises, such as “When I have the right to marry the person I love, then I will come to your side of the aisle.”

I am simply not willing to abandon my principles for the sake of a free lunch. I choose to work for a living and buy my own lunch, thank you.

When I state that I can find no Christian ethic in the progressive/liberal policies of today’s Democrat party the usual response is this. “Jesus told the wealthy to go and sell their possessions and give the proceeds to the poor.” That’s what the Democrats are trying to convince us that they are accomplishing by wanting laws that take money from the wealthy and dole it out to the poor.

That is not what Jesus meant at all. He didn’t demand that emperors and kings take money from the selfish wealthy and dole it out. He intended it to be a voluntary effort to show their “Christianity,” for lack of a better term in this discussion. I doubt that if Christ were alive today he would approve of society absolving people of personal responsibility to those less fortunate by voting for those who would “rob the rich and give to the poor.” Where is the virtue in that? There is none is there? It’s a simple fact that the more money confiscated by the IRS the less is collected in the plate on Sunday mornings, and that is where Christian charity lies.

If you are shocked by my political philosophy because my gender identity seems to dictate that I support a progressive/liberal/socialistic agenda consider this: in my experience, any attempt to share my political views, and reasons for those views, with members of the aforementioned group, generally leads to one of two responses. I’m either flatly informed that the person isn’t interested in my views or, “We’ll just have to agree to disagree.” That last statement would be reasonable enough if it followed an intelligent two-way give and take conversation … but it never does. It’s always a way to avoid reasonable discussion.

I have found it far easier to have a reasoned discussion about gender identity with a hyper-conservative Christian than I can a reasoned discussion about politics with a progressive/liberal/socialistic democrat. So with that said I will involve myself in activities of groups like the Log Cabin Republicans, the Tea Party and with the majority of conservatives who I have found to be willing to accept me for who I am rather than what I am.

Dirty Diapers? … “Oh Poor Me. Ain’t it Awful!”

Okay so I’ve been thinking it over, you know all the things that have been going on in the last few days, and even though I’m still upset I think it’s time for me to state my case. But, let me review couple of things first. In my early childhood in Oklahoma, there was no such thing as integration; equal rights, integrated schools, and integrated neighborhoods. The schools I attended through the fourth grade were strictly segregated. From a child’s perspective that’s just the way things were …That’s the way things were always going to be.

I don’t recall thinking that anything was wrong with it any more than I thought anything strange about where different people went to church on Sunday. That’s just the way American society was … That is until “American Society” began to change to “The Great Society” as a result of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which by the way, would have never passed without a lot of Republican support since a lot of Democrats were dead set against it..

Up until that point in time, two parent homes were the norm. Divorce, though it happened wasn’t a common occurrence and to tell you the truth, I have no memory of any child I knew living in a single-parent home. Off hand, I don’t know the exact percentage of marriages which ended in divorce in what we call today, white households. There were very few families I knew in which the parents were in their second marriage.

The limited exposure that I had to black families, the story was pretty much the same. On one of the broadcasts of the recent week I heard one statistic quoted that said at about that same time 70% of black households were two-parent households. So what happened?

Today, fewer than 50% of marriages in general avoid divorce. The statistic quoted on black households does not address divorce. It simply states that fewer than 25% of those households are two-parent households. Again I ask so what happened?

I can tell you what I think happened, and it all started with the Great Society. The Great Society ushered in an era of over tolerance. In other words, while the Great Society did make society aware of past intolerances that were unacceptable, it opened the door to what my grandmother and mother would call “Oh poor me. Ain’t it awful!” That was her way of pointing out to us that we were feeling sorry for ourselves and not accepting responsibility for our own actions and situations.

What the great Society did was to institutionalize and legitimize “Oh poor me, ain’t it awful!” In other words, it became legitimate to feel sorry for yourself and not accept responsibility for your own situation. This was followed by a certain segment of our political society; liberal senators and congressmen specifically, and gutless Republicans in name only, (Rino Republicans), guaranteeing their own reelections with Great Society handouts.

So what we have now is a whole segment of our society that believes they are not responsible for their own situations. They are being told by the media and liberal politicians that it’s not their fault; that it’s society’s fault for not nursing them properly. To be blunt about it we have a whole segment of our society which is still in emotional diapers and they are waiting for the rest of us to change their dirty diapers.

And that brings me to the events of this past week. While I do believe that there are a small number of good honest people involved in the black lives matter movement, I am convinced that the vast majority of them are waiting for someone to change their dirty diapers. They accept no responsibility whatsoever for their situation. To make it even worse the liberal progressives in our country pander to them by telling them it’s not their fault, that the Republicans are supposed to be changing their diapers for them.

Something I learned from the late Dr. Wayne Dyer years ago, was that what ever situation I found myself in at any given point in time was that if I tracked my own actions back far enough I would eventually come to a situation where by my own free will action I was led to the current situation. In other words, whatever situation I find myself in I am ultimately the one responsible for being there and no one else.

While those same politicians, pundits, civil rights advocates are not specifically responsible for the deaths of the five policemen in Dallas they most certainly set the stage for it. How is that you say? When people feel absolutely no responsibility for their own actions they become terribly suggestible and prone to doing whatever their particular segment in society encourages them to do. The vast majority of our news media are the ones who are doing the encouraging by broadcasting every stupid and violent act committed in the name of civil rights while airing more “Oh poor me. Ain’t it awful!” interviews with protesters.

What it’s come down to is this; the lie begun in Ferguson, Missouri that a man was holding his hands up and pleading “Don’t Shoot!” has been perpetuated as a truth by both the media and liberal politicians alike, irrespective of the irrefutable evidence to the contrary. That lie has spawned the notion that black lives matter more so than other lives.

So now we have hundreds of angry people parading up and down streets demanding that their dirty diapers be changed. And five policemen who were out there protecting all those dirty diaper people are dead. And they are dead because the liberal press and liberal politicians have refused to condemn the people who won’t change their own dirty diapers.

In closing, I only ask the following question of the protesters, who in my opinion are indirectly responsible for the death of those policemen, because after all if you hadn’t been out there marching those men would still be alive and with their families today; is it really equality you want or payback? If it’s payback you want, exactly what coin do you want that payback in? If it’s equality you want why don’t you act like you deserve it? Maybe you would feel that you have achieved that equality if the 136 black people killed by police in recent history, compared to the 275 white people killed by police in the same time period, had been killed by black police officers. Which is it?

So back to my original point referring to the number of households with two parents back then, compared to the number of homes with single parents now. Just a question and a thought; what percentage of those people out there marching the other night do you think came from two-parent households that taught personal responsibility? It’s not such a great Society anymore is it? Don’t cry on my shoulder until you’ve walked a few miles in my high heels.

I’m done.

The 4th of July … What it means to me!

Yes, it’s the 4th! The 4th of July! July 4th! July the 4th! Independence Day! For me it’s a day filled with memories and meanings. Great events have unfolded for me on July 4th. My most joyous and happiest 4th was the 4th of July 1952. I wrote about it in “Dear Mom and Dad.” That was the day that my old gray mare Ginger, presented me with a colt which I subsequently named Skyrocket. I think that from that day on I always expected great things to occur on July 4th. There were times when that did indeed happen.

In the early ‘50s do-gooders hadn’t yet stolen much of the excitement of American childhood by banning the stuff of a real 4th of July like real firecrackers, M-80’s, bottle rockets and the like. Of course that was supposed to protect the children, right? No, that was to absolve inattentive parents from the exercise of prudent judgement. But before that came to pass, there were battles along the shores of Kiddy Lake which involved small battlements of dirt and sand on which bottle necked bear cans were propped up. Then with the added assistance of small rocks and firecrackers those beer cans were converted to cannons. The battles would rage on for a couple of hours a day until that year’s supply of firecrackers was spent. From there we would move on to the latest model of sling shots or pea shooters.

The second greatest 4th of July event would of course happen 12 years later when I stopped for a midnight hamburger at the “Frostop” drive-in where I met the woman who would become the mother of my first 2 children. Although that memory does recall moments of joy it also recalls moments of hurt, betrayal and sadness.

Sadly, though the memories of 4ths of years past remain in vivid recall details, the meaning seems to have faded; not for me but for entirely too many of my fellow citizens. Without fail, there will be people like Jesse Watters of FOX news, interviewing what I can only classify as moronic products of an education system which has degenerated into a politically correct, though historically and educationally impotent production line which is aimed at determining time spent at a given level of education rather than lessons learned at a given level of education.

The question you might well be asking yourself is, why am I talking politics and education instead of gender identity issues? That’s a fair and reasonable question, especially on the subject of the 4th of July. I must admit that I think that answer should be fairly obvious. The independence declared on this date two hundred-forty years ago was a declaration of belief in the right of self-determination. Nowhere is the right of God given self-determination more infringed upon than the right of people like me, to determine to live lives that are congruent with our emotional and mental makeup as opposed to a life that is congruent with society’s norms based on the combination of 2 chromosomes.

Those 2 chromosomes are necessary for one simple reason … procreation. That’s it. They are not a determining factor in political outlook, who you love, where you live and who you associate with … and at the time the founding fathers stepped up to the plate and signed, what in many cases was the equivalent of their own death warrants, no one even knew how our anatomies would be determined. Furthermore, I don’t think they even cared. They simply wanted the freedom to determine the course of their own lives and the course of the lives of generations to follow.

The next question that’s asked of me is why would I choose to align myself with a political opinion which, on the surface is the very antithesis of the decision I’ve made about how to live my life? Another good question. The answer is just as good.

I’m not aligning myself with personalities. I’m aligning myself with a set of principles. It’s personalities not principles which condemn my choices. The principles of self-determination and personal freedom don’t give a damn what’s under my skirt. The principles of self-determination and freedom dictate that I make a careful examination of who in the government, established as a result of the declaration of July 4th, 1776 is going to best defend my right to self-determination and freedom.

It’s been my experience that while a certain segment of our political spectrum relies on a few biblical verses to restrict my freedoms, the other end of that spectrum demands laws which purport to defending me, i.e. hate crimes bills which are totally unnecessary if existing laws would just be enforced. In general, with each and every law passed another of the freedoms envisioned by the founding fathers all those years ago is eroded just a little bit further. And with each of those laws passed under the guise of helping the less fortunate, the people who are willing to work to achieve the results alluded to in “the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness”, another chunk of our freedoms is taken away.

For me … what I fear is that the same freedom eroding efforts of the people we elect to protect those freedoms; those efforts will eventually be turned against my community when our votes are no longer needed. Those same people who seem to not care what goes on in my bedroom want total control over everything that goes on in my life the minute I step out of my bedroom to, oh say to buy firecrackers, bottle rockets and M-80s. That is not what our founding fathers had in mind … at all.

What the 4th of July has come to represent for me is a time to re-commit to the principles which allow me the freedom to be … me.

The Orlando Alarm Clock

The one word that has consistently appeared on Facebook since the early hours of Sunday morning has been “LOVE”. It seems to have always been in the context of “Love your enemies” or most generally “Love, not hate, is the answer!” My question is: “The answer to what?” It certainly isn’t the answer for those families mourning the senseless loss their loved ones, now is it? Love was what they felt for those they lost in that horrible tragedy. I can assure you that Love is not what they feel for the hateful man who murdered their love ones. And I doubt seriously that Love is what they feel for Muslim terrorists either.

I can’t help but wonder if this will be a wake-up call for the collective community of Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and the Transgendered. It should be!! Our community has been so invested in liberal/progressive ideology that any person wishing to take on the mantle of leadership in our country, and does so under that banner is automatically assumed to have our best interest at heart. Personally, I don’t think they do.

At this point in time, our country is under the leadership of people who refuse, absolutely refuse, to call a spade a spade, a Muslim terrorist a Muslim terrorist. When our leaders are more concerned with offending a religious group than they are with defending and protecting the very citizens they are sworn to defend and protect, we have a serious problem.

As a dual-gendered human being who is a part of the trans-gendered community I should be fearful for my own well-being, but I’m not. I’m angry. I’m angry at leadership that has created an atmosphere of official complacency and resignation to the inevitability of death and destruction at the hands of Muslim terrorists. It would be so much easier for me to be just as angry at people who continue to support out leadership, but I can’t. I can’t be as angry at them because, well because they are my friends and I love them.

I did say “I can’t be as angry …” But I can be somewhat angry because most of them are posting things on Facebook and Twitter that mention “Love” but the context of that “Love” is that l “Love” will solve the problem; that love will overcome the hatred that spawned the tragedy. It won’t, not ever. At least not in that context. Here’s how “Love” will solve the problem.

Pacifism which is kin to acquiescent love, has a limited place in this world. That place is not in the face of such hatred and violence producing ideology as that of Muslim extremism. Ask a parent if they think pacifism is the answer to defending their children against an ideology driven violence that would cast them off the roof of a tall building because of who they sleep with or because of the clothing they wear. I can assure you that the answer to that question will be an unequivocal, NO!

My grandmother, the oft mentioned “Granny,” was fond of saying that, “Charity begins at home.” Indeed, it does. In this case it begins with loving America, American values and Americans first. That means that our charity at home precludes placing the feelings of people who ascribe to a religious system which fosters such vicious hatred, as that seen in Orlando, ahead of the safety our own families and fellow citizens. So, how about replacing the word “Charity” in Granny’s phrase with Love. Let love begin at home and let that love express itself in taking the action necessary to eradicate the hateful ideology of radical Islam.

How do we eradicate that hateful ideology? I’ll take another of Granny’s methods for an example. When I was, probably less than 4 years old, my younger brother and I were with Granny at the camp in New Mexico and she had opened up the athletic supply shed for us to find things to keep us occupied. I selected a bow and arrow. I wasn’t strong enough to draw it back very far and the arrow was a blunt pointed target arrow. I chose my little brother as a target. The arrow struck him squarely in the middle of the chest and simply bounced off, leaving a little red mark.

Granny saw it all and I will never forget the sight of her charging across the yard with “discipline” on her mind. It’s a whipping I will never forget any more than I will forget being locked away in the supply shed for an extended period of time. My point? I never ever even considered pointing a weapon of any kind at my brother. I didn’t ever consider it because the reaction to my action was so severe as to eliminate the possibility of a repeat of the action.

We cannot simply Love our way to safety. We must discipline and act our way to safety. If we, as a nation, are to ever live in the peace that allows us to grow, prosper and achieve a harmony here at home, the threat that is Radical Islam, including the theological root from which it rose, must be totally and completely destroyed. Period!

Love is the answer, only if it is the kind of love that engenders the courage to act and stand up to the destructive nature of the hatred that cost the lives of all those people in Orlando, in the early morning hours of June 12, 2016. Ask the families of those people how that “Love thing” is working for them today.

Do you get my point? The safety of our LGB … T community lies not in the embrace of liberal progressivism which refuses to call a spade a spade. The safety of our LGB … T community lies in the embrace of those who recognize genuine active hatred for what it is and are willing to take the actions required to secure our freedoms … including the freedoms to show our love for those we love and visibly express who we are by the way we dress.

Wake up … The reality alarm clock is going off and the snooze button is broken.