Georgia’s Hypocrites Expose Christian Privilege

(Note: The following is an article by David 2 as part of his weekly “Brutally Honest” column.  The article appears with his permission.)

Georgia’s Hypocrites Expose Christian Privilege
– by David 2

There is nothing more terrifying to a self-righteous person than the realization that they may actually not be the center of the universe.

It doesn’t matter if we’re talking about the actual universe or the “universe” that they survey, the self-righteous hoard power and domination worse than any obsessive-compulsive hoarder in those cable-channel TV shows. They believe that the universe operates in a particular way and that it is by cosmic design.

Of course, it’s no small coincidence that this great “design” happens to benefit them. This benefit doesn’t have to be much either. It could simply be living their lives as they are right now. It could just be their mundane job and their mundane marriage and their mundane family in their mundane neighborhood. It could just be the great status quo, which they believe everything has always been and always will be.

And like any compulsive hoarder, they feel absolutely threatened when anyone or anything comes to disrupt their “perfect” living. It doesn’t even have to affect them directly. It doesn’t even have to physically be in “their universe”! It could be something they heard on the cable news channels or talk radio or whispered in those chat rooms and email threads they get. Whatever it is, it challenges what they believe is how things should be, and thus it is a “threat” to them personally.

And that brings us to Newton County, Georgia. It’s a podunk little good-ol’-boy county just south of my location. Then again, pretty much everything outside of Atlanta is a podunk little good-ol’-boy county.

It seems some very religious people want to set up a house of worship in their quaint podunk little good-ol’-boy county. A place of worship and a cemetery.

The good news is that bible-thumping self-righteous citizens here in these quaint podunk little good-ol’-boy counties will rubberstamp the approval of any house of worship and cemetery faster than you can say “Amen”!

The bad news is that this only applies to Christian houses of worship and cemeteries… and the group of religious people we’re talking about are not Christians. They’re Muslims.

They had might as well be Satanists. Actually in the fragile little minds of these people from podunk little good-ol’-boy counties, Satanists, Muslims, Agnostics, and Atheists are all one-in-the same. They all fall into that black-and-white category of “Not Us”.

No, the so-called “God-fearing” Christians of Newton County do not tolerate Muslims. They are, after all, the enemy. Just ask Donald Trump. He’ll tell you so. They’re terrorists. They’re murderers. They’re evil to the core. They hate America and they want to subjugate the world to the worst kind of law that ever could be invented… Sharia Law. And don’t think for a moment that I’m over-exaggerating the sentiment these “God-fearing” Christians of Newton County exhibited over this subject! This was all over the news, especially on the local talk radio stations, where the echo chamber of propaganda amplified their fears and magnified their paranoia.

“The Muslims are coming! The Muslims are coming! And they’re coming for your children if you let them come in!” That’s the script they regurgitated on 106.7FM. One good-ol’-boy even circulated fliers that suggested letting Muslims come into their “God-fearing” county would be the death knell for the United States.

Oh they tried to be civil about it. They tried to have a rational conversation about it. They even brought in a representative from the Counsel on American-Islamic Relations, which, to many a thumper was like bringing in “Baghdad Bob”, the former mouthpiece to the late Saddam Hussein.

But they had to at least put up the front. They had to pretend to be civil.

And then the county leader did what they felt they “had” to do when faced with this much vitriol and outright Islamo-hate. They simply made a blanket ban of all houses of worship from setting up shop in their podunk little good-ol’-boy county. They couldn’t discriminate against one religion, so they discriminated against all religions.

God bless America! Land of the not-so-free and home of the gutless cowards!

But I’m really not surprised by this! Not in the least! The Muslims were going up against years upon years of entrenched self-righteousness and bigotry. You can’t overcome that overnight, especially in a time of neo-conservatives, Brexit, and Donald Trump!

And this isn’t even the first time we’ve seen this happen! This is actually the third county in the past few years that Muslims were met with self-righteous hostility simply for wanting to be there!

But that isn’t the punchline to this sad and pathetic social joke we call Georgia governance.

No, the punchline comes from the “’Murican” that called in and said that the reason why they don’t want the Muslims to set up shop in the United States is because “they support Sharia Law”, while we “have the separation of Church and State”.

Since when, Goober? Since when?!?

Don’t get me wrong, Goober; we really do have the Separation of Church and State. I don’t deny that at all. But since when did you and your ilk suddenly become believers of it?

You see, it wasn’t that long ago that all of the bible-thumping self-righteous Christians threw screaming temper tantrums when Georgia’s governor vetoed their so-called “Religious Freedom” bill. It was a bill that would have legalized out-and-out discrimination on the basis of religious bias. It was to make sure that people like Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis wouldn’t be held to account for their religious discrimination here in Georgia.

And every time the subject was about bringing prayer into schools, or removing “In God We Trust” from our currency, or shoving huge Ten Commandment monuments on government property (which actually were done as publicity props for the Cecil B. DeMille movie), or outlawing same-sex marriages or same-sex nightclubs or anything involving the LGBT community, you and your ilk scream at the top of your lungs that there is “no such thing” as the Separation of Church and State! That it supposedly “doesn’t exist”! It’s just a “figment” of the liberal imagination! It’s “manufactured”. “’Murcia is a Christian Nation”, you cry out each and every time, and you supposedly have a right, if not an out-and-out God-mandated obligation, to impose your beliefs on the community through laws and policies and regulations.

But when it comes to Muslims? Suddenly the whole “Separation of Church and State” magically appears, and the very idea that a certain religious belief could possibly influence local government is suddenly “dangerous”.

Except, of course, when it is your own.

Let’s get brutally honest here… the hyper-inflated hyper-politicized hysteria over Muslims even existing here in the South has exposed not only the ugliness of the self-righteous redneck ‘Muricans, but it also exposed something even more destructive to American freedoms: Christian Privilege.

Christian Privilege is exactly what it suggests. It presupposes that Christianity – be it a particular sect, or in general – is somehow superior to all other religions in society. When you say that America is established on Judo-Christian laws, you are claiming Christian Privilege. When you claim that America is a “Christian Nation”, you are claiming Christian Privilege.

And when you claim that America needs to enforce laws based on your Christian beliefs – such as prohibiting same-sex marriages – while at the same time screaming at the fear of any kind of Sharia Law being introduced, you are claiming Christian Privilege.

Look at the supposed “conditions” being imposed by the self-righteous on any idea of the Muslims coming into Newton County. They demand that all Muslims condemn extremism, condemn any and all forms of terrorism committed around the world by any other Muslim, and they demand absolute and unconditional assurances that nobody attending any future mosque service not have any connection to terrorism, either personal or familial.

What if we imposed those kinds of rules twenty years ago when Baptist extremists were telling followers to kill doctors that perform abortions? What if we demanded they go above and beyond to prove that all Baptist ministers don’t advocate murder or other acts of terrorism? Or how about the Catholic Church, when there were rampant stories of them hiding away and shuffling around pedophile priests? How loud do you think the cries of “persecution” would be? How fast do you think the judiciary would leap to put a stop to that kind of reaction?

And yet we have self-righteous ‘Muricans making demands on all Muslims based entirely on fear and hysteria for the “privilege” of living in “their” county, and nobody thinks twice about it. That too is Christian Privilege.

I wish I could say that I’m disgusted at what I see, but I can’t… because I’ve lived here in the South for almost thirty years now and I know this is what is at the ugly core of many of the people here. And these aren’t just county leaders or church officials. These are neighbors and friend and family members. These are people I work with and talk with and meet at social gatherings. And all I can do is just smile and tolerate their biases and be thankful that I’m not at the receiving end of it.

Because I know what it at the heart of their biases and paranoia. It’s not that some Muslim would show up in “their” universe, or that some same-sex couple will move into “their” neighborhood. It’s the fear of the inevitable reality that drives them to hypocrisy. It’s the fear that one day they won’t be the center of their universe. That the universe they know won’t reflect anything they believe in. That one day, more people in “their” universe will be less like them and more like everything they abhor.

They fear that at some point in the future they may have to entertain the speculation that they could be… wrong.

It’s easy to say that everything is “right” when everything in “their” universe validates it. They don’t have to defend the righteousness of their beliefs. “Their” universe does that for them. That’s the power of the status quo, and it’s easy to become addicted to it and to hoard as much of it as they can.

Unfortunately for them, nothing lasts forever… even in “their” universe. And hoarders learn eventually that their obsession with holding on to those things causes rot and stagnation. And in Newton County and other places here in Georgia, that hoarder’s rot is getting noticed.

Why Hillary Clinton Will Lose to Donald Trump

By Contributor Ronald Bruce Meyer

Now the balloons have fallen and the delegates have voted. The DNC got what it wanted: Hillary Clinton, the first female candidate to head a major party ticket in a general election.

Hillary has everything going for her: experience, connections, money. She is the most-qualified presidential candidate in modern history; she brought a lot of famous and high-powered testimonials to the convention stage. Videos showed Hillary’s softer side; her acceptance speech showed her toughness. The convention crowd sounded ready for Hillary and her response showed she is ready to fight for her program and against her Republican opponent.

And, incredibly and ironically, just about 100 days from today, she will lose. Why? I will give you five reasons.

  1. Hillary Clinton has misread the electorate. Hillary Clinton had an overwhelming superdelegate lead and major endorsements, hours of neutral or approving media coverage, plus strong super PAC money (mostly from corporations)—almost from the day she announced her candidacy in 2015. And yet, a 74-year-old Independent senator from Vermont, a self-described democratic socialist (which should have been a dirty word in pro-capitalist USA), won 22 states outright and tied the Clinton juggernaut in a few more. Bernie Sanders drew huge crowds to his rallies and raised millions in donations (mostly from individuals) without super PAC assistance.

Was there something in the American electorate that Bernie saw and tapped into that, perhaps, Hillary did not see? I think, more than anything else, Bernie read the anger and frustration of an economic system that is not working for the bottom 90% of the electorate: a jobless “recovery” from the Bush recession, bailouts for bankers but not homeowners, no prosecutions for the biggest failure of capitalism since the Great Depression and income inequality on a scale not seen since the Gilded Age.

I also think that the type of donor to each campaign was telling: voters saw who was donating to Hillary’s campaign—Wall Street and bankers (Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley), the private prison industry, big media (Time Warner, etc), unions accustomed to being out of touch with their own workers, other large corporations (including Harvard and UC)—and assumed that, if elected, she would be working for them; then voters looked at who was donating to Bernie (voters with maybe $27 in their pockets and tiny donations from unions and a few other non-corporations) and hoped he would be working for them.

But Hillary was not completely tone deaf. Once she saw how popular Bernie’s ideas were with young people, a demographic she desired but was not reaching, she advocated some pale imitations of Bernie’s platform. But the electorate was not misled: Hillary’s corporate backers could see her wink when she repudiated the TPP and advocated health care for all and Wall Street regulation; young voters, engaged if not enraged, better informed than their parents were and personally suffering from centrist policies, could see where she borrowed her new ideas and reasoned that they should stick to the source rather than siding with the stream.

If we are judged by the company we keep, Hillary also had some tellingly bad friends: if it wasn’t feminist icon Gloria Steinem (“When you’re young, you’re thinking: ‘Where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie’”) and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright (“There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other”), it was embracing former Nixon Secretary of State and putative war criminal Henry Kissinger as her foreign policy advisor.

And then there was Hillary’s VP choice. As front runner and all-but-nominee, she could have chosen anybody. With an eye toward her opponent, she could have taken a bold step and asked a true progressive to join her to energize disappointed if not disaffected Bernie supporters. Instead, she chose a white male of questionable loyalty to progressive principles. Sen. Tim Kaine approves of the disastrous corporate takeover known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and voted to fast track the agreement—meaning that, even if Hillary was sincere about working with Congress to change the TPP into something more palatable, she could not. Kaine, among other senators, urged the Consumer Financial Protection Board regulators to lighten up on their regulation of regional banks, which may have something to do with his securities and investment sector donors.

Tim Kaine, as filmmaker Michael Moore pointed out in a tweet, was a choice from a “center” that doesn’t exist. He is a feint to a constituency that will stay home, rather than vote for a policy blend that is more a throwback to 1992 than a vision for 2016; an appeal to a voting bloc that was disappearing over the past generation, but has evaporated since the crash of 2008. Voters who stay home cannot help her. If she fails this dismally in reading the electorate, Hillary Clinton cannot hope to win.

  1. Hillary Clinton is a weak candidate. Hillary is distrusted by two-thirds of voters. Unfair as that may be, whether misperception or a “vast, right-wing conspiracy,” perception is reality in politics. On the other hand, you saw (when the mainstream media didn’t ignore them) the crowds of tens of thousands cheering Bernie Sanders. Hillary can’t even dream of getting young, excited, informed, politically involved voters to support her on her merits. The best she can do is frighten them with Donald Trump.

Her acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention was like celery: filling (full of clichés), but with no nutritional value (lacking a theme). Where she was best was in parroting policies, if not lines, from Bernie Sanders. But she didn’t pledge to ban fracking or promise to fight against the TPP. She gave her supporters and her skeptics nothing to dispel the notion that she is still pro-war, pro-Wall Street, pro-spying (domestic and warrantless), pro-censorship (of the Internet), pro-death penalty, pro-Patriot Act (and thinks Edward Snowden is a criminal, rather than an exposer of criminals). Furthermore, she is anti-BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions against Israel to get equal treatment for Palestinians), anti-legalization of marijuana and anti-free speech (she thinks flag-burning should be a felony).

When the electorate clearly longs for a progressive candidate, Hillary Clinton gives them Republican-lite. Is it any wonder people leaning progressive would rather have somebody else (and feel stuck with her) and people leaning Republican would rather go with a real Republican?

Her platform and her policy positions show voters that Hillary has no vision—beyond that of getting elected. And calling herself “a progressive who gets things done” is a bit disconcerting coming from Hillary: in her efforts to compromise with Republicans who already agree with her corporatist and militarist views, she may give away the store—just as Obama did with the public option during the fight for the Affordable Care Act.

  1. Hillary Clinton’s opponent is playing a different game. By contrast, Donald Trump got the electorate right, just with the wrong solutions. The popular meme is that Trump supporters are lower class and uneducated. In fact, Trump is currently the front-runner among every income and education group in the GOP. The chief explanation for Trump’s appeal, clearly based on fear, is articulated by David Berg, a clinical professor of psychiatry at the Yale School of Medicine: “Trump appeals to the anger, discontent and sense of entrapment that plague contemporary voters.” Indeed, “Many in this country are tired of having their speech and behavior constrained by the changing ‘sensibilities’ of the modern world. Many would like to ‘stand up’ to Putin and the Chinese (to say nothing of ISIS) in the belief that confrontation and belligerence will make the world safer.” Trump has tapped into this feeling, amplified it and redirected it.

The lack of meaningful recovery after the crash of 2008 hurt liberal and conservative citizens alike; the elites, not so much. But where liberals look for causes and cures, and work as a community to change their world, conservatives are encouraged to feel powerless to change their world, look for domestic and foreign “others” on which to fix blame, and yearn for direction from above. That is reflected in these telling words from Trump’s acceptance speech for the Republican nomination: “I am your voice. … I’m With You, and I will fight for you, and I will win for you.”

Moreover, Trump stole some progressive thunder from the other side: “Remember, it was Bill Clinton who signed NAFTA, one of the worst economic deals ever made by our country. Never again.” And “[Hillary] has supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership—which will not only destroy our manufacturing, but it will make America subject to the rulings of foreign governments.” And “We will build the roads, highways, bridges, tunnels, airports, and the railways of tomorrow. This, in turn, will create millions more jobs.” And “Millions of Democrats will join our movement, because we are going to fix the system so it works fairly, and justly, for each and every American.”

By contrast, Hillary’s speech was long on cliché and short on progressivity. Maybe she thinks she can do without her progressive, working-class base, the Bernie Sanders supporters, or the 39% of the electorate who identify as “independent”—that is, those so turned off by hyper-partisanship that they can’t stand either party—which constitute a larger voting percentage that either Democrat (32%) or Republican (23%). Furthermore, Hillary was late to the table with holding big business accountable for economic devastation: “It’s wrong to take tax breaks with one hand and give out pink slips with the other.” And “I believe Wall Street can never, ever be allowed to wreck Main Street again.” And for a candidate who refuses to ban fracking, it’s ironic to hear her say, “I believe that climate change is real and that we can save our planet while creating millions of good-paying clean energy jobs.”

There are other troubling signs. As the popular meme goes, Trump only brags about doing bad things; Hillary has actually done them. What sounds like Hillary-bashing is supported by her record and that of Hillary and Bill during the Clinton administration.

  • Trump complains about millions of people on food stamps and in public housing; the Clinton administration passed so-called welfare reform, cutting off a lifeline for many poor people—as if the national debt is caused by people with no power and no money.
  • She says Trump wants to ban Muslin immigration, but Hillary wants to continue bombing Muslim countries, threatening to hit Iran (the enemy she is “most proud of”) if they so much as blink at Israel and supporting a no-fly zone over Syria, where ISIL and Al-Qaida have no airplanes, but where the U.S. would have to commit 70,000 troops.
  • She calls Trump a racist, but Hillary supports racist policies. She volunteered for segregationist presidential candidate Barry Goldwater in the 1960s; as First Lady, she infamously called African-American youth “superpredators,” while actively campaigning for her husband’s crime bill; while criticizing Trump for his association with KKK leader David Duke, Hillary admitted to being mentored by high-ranking KKK member Senator Robert Byrd, even eulogizing him at his funeral.
  • She claims Trump will destroy the economy, but Hillary and her husband have promoted the job-killing North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and she has refused to categorically oppose the TPP. Her husband took the lead, with her support, in repealing the Glass–Steagall Legislation, which lead to the housing and economic crash—and bank bailouts—of 2008.
  • She says Trump is too irresponsible to hold the nuclear codes, but Hillary is a seasoned militarist (see #4 below).
  1. Hillary Clinton has other serious flaws. There is no reason to believe that if she becomes the first woman President, Hillary will be treated any differently by the “vast, right-wing conspiracy” to whom truth is a leisure service of politics. In the run-up to the election, for the next three months, you will see what an entire Clinton II administration will look like from the right wing that hates Hillary more than they ever hated her husband.

Bernie Sanders is a gentleman, a statesman and a patriot, so he declined to make a big deal of the very clear evidence of primary election-rigging and millions of dollars’ worth of media bias toward Hillary Clinton. But the Republican right wing will not be so gentle or so gentlemanly. Hillary can take it, you say? OK.

How about her Iraq vote? Yes, she said a few times (but only after 2007) that it was “a mistake,” and in her 2014 book <em>Hard Choices</em>, that she “got it wrong.” But <em>she has never apologized</em> for the mistake that ended up costing 4,500 American lives, perhaps a half million Iraqi lives, and a dramatic increase in the federal deficit, occasioning in major cutbacks to important social programs—and resulted in the creation of ISIL. She wasn’t alone in this vote, but the only presidential candidate who voted <em>for</em> the AUMF is asking us to trust her policy judgment after this “mistake.”

But let’s take Hillary at her word. Did she learn from her “mistake”? Perhaps not: As Secretary of State under President Obama, whose legacy she vows to continue, Hillary backed a major U.S. “surge” in Afghanistan (70% of the U.S. soldiers who have died in Afghanistan have died since Mr. Obama took office). She supports torture by the U.S., including the war crime of waterboarding, just not when performed by other countries. She supports the illegal expansion of the state of Israel into Palestine. Indeed, her promise to continue meddling in the Middle East hurts people and helps only weapons contractors—her donors. According to <em>Time Magazine</em>, Hillary Clinton’s State Department “helped enable Obama’s expansion of lethal drone strikes [which increased 300% since George W. Bush left office]. In fact, Clinton may have been the administration’s most reliable advocate for military action.” She supported the illegal U.S. bombing of Libya, now a failed state. She supports boots-on-the-ground regime change in Syria: according to <em>Time</em>, “She pressed Obama to arm the Syrian rebels, and later endorsed air strikes against the Assad regime.” And, after a coup to overthrow the Honduran democracy in 2009, she backed a fascist military dictatorship in its place.

Her legacy stems from support of her husband’s policies (1993-2001). She supported U.S invasions of or attacks against Haiti (1994 and formerly a democracy), Bosnia (1995), and Kosovo (1999). She “urged” her husband to bomb Yugoslavia (illegally, 1999)—indeed, this was a pretext to expand NATO, violating an agreement with Russia that NATO would not move “one inch” east of West Germany (and we wonder why Vladimir Putin gets upset at NATO encirclement!). As late as 2007, she supported the illegal U.S. embargo against Cuba.

Indeed, according to one website, “At the end of the year in which Clinton left her position as Secretary of State (2013), the Obama regime’s USA was voted, in a Win/Gallup poll of 65 countries around the world, as the single greatest threat to world peace, with the runner-up (Pakistan, an Islamic fundamentalist US ally) receiving three times fewer votes, and Russia receiving twelve times fewer votes.”

But it doesn’t end there. Hillary Clinton has been, and will be, the subject of multiple investigations—especially should she be elected without clear Democratic majorities in the House and Senate. Republicans will (I think treasonously) tie up the people’s business in favor of hamstringing and stymieing any progress Hillary tries to make on her agenda. Just as they did to her husband with the Monica Lewinsky “scandal”; just as they have tried to do with Mr. Obama. Republicans will block her at every turn, dog her with scandals real or invented (it’s a distinction without a difference to the Fox News crowd) and, if anything, be harder on her than on the scandal-free Obama. It would not be surprising to find Articles of Impeachment land on her desk the day after she takes office.

  1. Hillary Clinton is an enigma. In his notorious 2008 campaign ad, then-Senator Barack Obama said: “Hillary Clinton. She’ll say anything, and change nothing.” Whether or not this is true, voters are asking: Just who is Hillary Clinton? Whose side is she on? Can Hillary be trusted?

In 2008, Hillary was the front-runner, but then voters abandoned her in favor of a freshman Senator from Illinois. Was it because they would rather have voted for the first African-American president than the first female president? Or was it because voters felt they could trust Mr. Obama more than Mrs. Clinton? Polls seem to indicate that voters favored Obama largely because he was not Hillary.

A June Rasmussen poll, quoted by Fast Company, found 46% of likely voters saying Hillary was less honest than most other politicians (45% said the same of Trump). This may be confirmation bias, as the article claims, in which case tough for Hillary. People already “know” she is a liar—there are many instances in which she has verifiably stretched the truth, but no more than many male politicians (including her husband)—but this explains why Republicans don’t trust her. What about the 33% of <em>Democrats</em> who think she is less than candid? She plays the gender card, but denies she plays it; she denies being part of establishment politics, even while reveling in it; she offered multiple excuses for why she used a private e-mail server instead of abiding by State Department and Public Records law (FBI director James Comey, a George W. Bush appointee, said there is evidence that she was extremely careless in her handling of very sensitive, highly classified information, including eight chains with highly classified information, 36 with secret information and another eight with confidential information); she even distorted the record of a true progressive (Bernie Sanders); to prove that she is really a progressive.

Then there is the election rigging. As usual, Hillary’s fingerprints are not found on this, but the evidence is clear and convincing—as the leaked e-mails and other sources demonstrate: targeted voter suppression, registration tampering, illegal voter purges, exit polling discrepancies, evidence for voting machine tampering, the security (or lack thereof) of various voting machine types. In any other country, this election cycle would trigger a U.N. investigation.

There is not much I can say to recommend Trump, but as one pundit put it, “[W]ith every force in the Republican party against him, [Trump] won fair and square. He abided by the rules.” The same cannot be said of Hillary: “Hillary Clinton had all the money, name recognition, and advantages any candidate could. And yet, the DNC had to rig the election in her favor.”

For all these reasons, Hillary Clinton will have a difficult time winning the presidency in November. Many of her problems stem from her personality and her background as a corporate Democrat. Many of her problems, like the right-wing haters who will never accept her, are out of her control. But whether it is her bad policy decisions or the perception of her duplicity, whether it is her misreading the electorate or misreading her opponent, whether she plays the First-Woman-President card or the Be-Afraid-of-Donald-Trump card, there is a sliver of hope in her electoral prospects. If Hillary were to become and behave as progressive as Bernie Sanders actually is, addressing with real solutions the real problems that galvanized Bernie’s followers, and even some Trump supporters, she might get independent voters to emerge from their dejection and eke out a win in November, in spite of her frighteningly negative numbers.

I don’t see that happening. It’s not in her nature. And that is why I believe Hillary will lose. And she will lose YOOGE.

AHREDUX – Episode 7 August 1, 2016

After an important and short non-partisan message, AHREDUX Episode 7 takes off and runs completely off the rails! Now that the Republican National Convention is over, RJ takes on the GOP in the only way he knows how… By re-enacting Drumpf’s acceptance speech! And, you will not believe just how far off the rails this gets!

America – You Deserve What You Are About To Get

BuByeI haven’t written much of anything on this blog the past year.  I’ve been devoting most of my time to AH REDUX videos. The rest of my time has been given over to yard work, honey-dos, and updating the video editing and music studios. To make matters worse, the AH REDUX schedule was disrupted by vacation plans. I decided to take a week-long road trip vacation during the Rethuglican National wütend blitzkrieg Abkommen. Das Führer, Donald Drumpf, and his braindead, sky-zombie loving, white hooded, rabid disciples of doom, and democracy crushing dunderheads, opened the 2016 presidential race by machine-gunning the Constitution, totally obliterating the notion of freedom and liberty for all, and E Pluribus Unum.  Half of what America used to stand for is now dead.  The other half is on life support. Hitler, Mussolini, and Idi Amin Dada would be proud.

Sit down! Shut the fuck up! Listen for once!

Yeah, you!  I’m talking to you America!  At the beginning of every AH REDUX episode I ask the question, “What the fuck is wrong with you America?”  It’s a reasonable and logical question.  And, the answer to the question is far too complex to convey in this article.  Suffice it to say… It’s too late anyway.  America – You deserve what you are about to get.   And, what you are about to get is nothing short of, “The End”.  The great experiment is over.

In a letter to John Taylor in 1814 John Adams wrote:

Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide.”

Ben Franklin wrote in Emblematical Representations, ca. 1774:

“History affords us many instances of the ruin of states, by the prosecution of measures ill-suited to the temper and genius of their people. The ordaining of laws in favor of one part of the nation, to the prejudice and oppression of another, is certainly the most erroneous and mistaken policy. An equal dispensation of protection, rights, privileges, and advantages, is what every part is entitled to, and ought to enjoy… These measures never fail to create great and violent jealousies and animosities between the people favored and the people oppressed; whence a total separation of affections, interests, political obligations, and all manner of connections, by which the whole state is weakened.” 

“The End” isn’t coming to America courtesy of a foreign invader.  “The End” isn’t the result of a terrorist attack.  “The End” is brought to us by… us.  You and me.  Everyone.  American arrogance, ignorance, complacency, stupidity, imperialism, nationalism, populism, greed, selfishness, paranoia… and… FEAR.  “The End” is the opening credit for a new and far more terrifying era in, what will be, the short history of our country.  It’s also the epitaph for freedom and liberty for all.  “The End” will now mark the transition from democracy to demagoguery, freedom and liberty to indentured servitude and compliance to the State. America – You deserve what you are about to get.

“The End”

Fasten your seatbelts and hold tight America.  “The End” is going to hurt, and hurt bad.  But, you’re masochists anyway.  So, it should be a true pleasure for you.  Every story has to have an end.  For the United States of America… “My country tis of thee… sweet land of libe… of thee… of thee… of thee… I… I… I…”

Bu bye.

 

A Postscript…

It’s been interesting to see all the comments on my Facebook in response to my article. I find the ignorance of some of them utterly amazing! More than that, the point of my article was missed, and in many cases, assumed aligned with everything from Marxism, Socialism (a not-so-flattering and incorrect interpretation of the word), and Communism. And yet, I’m a sane Libertarian who believes that without a federal government, we would not be the “United States of America”. But, instead… A conglomeration of individual countries with all the biases and prejudices of religious and political ideologies, and the horrors that go with them. It’s sad to think that the negative comments put forth over this article are not aberrations, but indicative of just how terribly divided we have become as citizens of this country. Unfortunately, these negative comments are strong evidence in support of the article. Given the state of our union (at best a tenuous one) maybe it’s time to heed the lessons of history and the civilizations that have fallen as a result of the same symptoms. I will close, not with “God Bless America”, because that is part of our problem, but with E Pluribus Unum. “Out of Many, One”

Happy 4th Of July!

Hey everyone, David 2 here…

Since today is the 4th of July, I thought it would be a good idea to share a little video series I did five years ago.  The audio came from a ShockNet Radio broadcast from 2010 from a little radio program I did called “Brutally Honest”.

This is a three-part look at what freedom truly is.  What makes up freedom, what doesn’t make up freedom, and how easily it can be destroyed.

If you love freedom as we do, please share this with your friends.

And Happy 4th of July to my fellow Americans!

Top 10 Reasons Donald Trump is a “Real” Christian

From contributing author Ronald Bruce Meyer

And Why Americans Love Him

 

10. Like conservative Christians, Trump seems to be afraid of damn near everything: brown people, other religions, the government, liberals, homosexuals, women breast feeding-pretty much anything that’s not a heterosexual, white conservative Christian.

9. Like conservative Christians, Trump is demeaning to women. “You know, it doesn’t really matter what [the media] write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass.”

8. After previously making favorable statements about the right to abortion, like conservative Christians, Trump now claims to be pro-life-and, also like conservative Christians, Trump says, “Planned Parenthood should absolutely be defunded.”

7. Like conservative Christians, Trump denies human-caused climate change: “We’ll be fine with the environment. We can leave a little bit, but you can’t destroy businesses.” He has also tweeted, “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.”

6. Like conservative Christians, Trump thinks socialism is evil: he criticizes Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders’s democratic socialist beliefs as “a short road to failure for this country.” And, also like conservative Christians, he doesn’t know-or care-about the differences between socialism and communism.

5. Like conservative Christians, Trump would like to see schools compete: charters, vouchers, and magnets-in effect inviting unaccountable corporate control of education-at to cut the Department of Education and Common Core standards. And, also like conservative Christians, Trump personifies the ignorance of facts and issues that results from a lack of education.

4. Like conservative Christians, Trump seems to have no problem chastising a poor family on food stamps or welfare-which he counterfactually calls an “outrageously mismanaged government program”-but considers anyone “un-American” who dares to call a wealthy person a greedy bastard.

3. Although he admits he knows little about guns, Trump seems to support them just as much as gun-obsessed conservative Christians. “We’re going to cherish the Second Amendment,” Trump said during a campaign stop in Washington state. And Trump argued that the November 2015 massacre in Paris would have “would have played out differently with the bullets flying in the other direction.”

2. Like conservative Christians, Trump seems to be OK with torture… of foreigners, preferably swarthy ones, because “we have to beat the savages.” Plus, he believes in family values at home, but it’s OK to kill the families of terrorists abroad.

1. Like conservative Christians, Trump is racist: he suggests that Hispanic and Latino immigrants constitute a criminal class who want to rape and murder white women, and who, on the one hand, are stealing the jobs of “real” Americans, but who are also lazy moochers!