About Me

Name: ICONIC FREEDOM
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

ON THE ISSUES: THE ALLIANCE DEFENSE FUND

Recently at my precinct meeting a representative from the Alliance Defense Fund gave a speech.   It started with demonizing the ACLU, followed by invoking entitlement, advanced with subjective ideology of what government is about and lacking in character, integrity and forthrightness.

Demonizing the ACLU to further your personal agenda brings no credibility.

You mean this ACLU:

2004: trial regarding allegations of Rush Limbaugh's drug abuse, the ACLU argued that his privacy should not have been compromised by allowing law enforcement examination of his medical records

1997: Internet Free Speech in ACLU v. Reno, the court struck down the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which censored the Internet by banning "indecent" speech.  Although this was a major First Amendment victory for the information age, the battle continues; the ACLU often finds itself defending online free speech from further assault.  (one reason we have the ability to speak openly on blogs)

1986: The ACLU also defended Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North, whose conviction was tainted by coerced testimony — a violation of his Fifth Amendment rights.

In 1973: the ACLU was the first major national organization to call for the impeachment of President Richard Nixon, giving as reasons the Nixon administration's violations of civil liberties. 

In 1967: the ACLU successfully argued against state bans on interracial marriage, in the case of Loving v. Virginia.

1954: Brown v. Board of Education: the ACLU, having long supported the legal battle for equal education, celebrated a majority victory when the Supreme Court declared that racially segregated schools were in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment in a case brought by the NAACP

1942: Fighting for the Internment of Japanese Americans: the ACLU stood almost alone in denouncing the federal government’s interment of more than 110,000 Japanese Americans in concentration camps.
 

The favor and entitlement ADF screams about the ACLU doing, is exactly what ADF is doing: seeking favor from legislators or the courts to support their personal specific view of life, what choices a person should make and how to live life, even to the assumption of existence – they believe and you best, too!  What happened to the founders idea of freedom of the conscious mind to decide for self?

Crosses on mountains that are on government property utilizing pluralistic tax dollars does not limit government, it expands its reach and favors one religious view over another.  Private property, no problem, no one cares.  Government property – it’s gotta go.  Society doesn’t exist for you!

Just because we haven’t developed past certain discriminations, doesn’t mean the courts aren’t accurately reversing some of the bullying that has gone on with regard to the upholding personal freedom. 

Slavery, suffrage, interracial marriage, discrimination – any of these sound familiar, all “traditions” at one time in our society, all tolerated by society, some even using the bible as credential to continue or further it.

Finally, the speaker had the Obama-audacity to say that government has interest in the family propagating to help pay taxes and fund our society.   How absurd!  This is antithetical to freedom, free choice, free markets and limited government.  Not to mention bigoted – there are lots of variants when it comes to creating families through a variety of methods. This myopic view of life is breathtaking.

Society existed long before any government came upon it to tax it and spend like thieves. If government “cannot run its household on the liberal allowance it receives” from the current tax payers then it is the legislators responsibility to live within their means and cut spending.

The ONLY reason a person would make such a declaration is to impose a subjective and ideological view of the world upon everyone else – just like liberal democrats.  

Yes, the ACLU & ADF over-reach; yes, the ACLU & ADF fight for freedom; yes, the ACLU & ADF  have their place in society.  

However, for the Alliance Defense Fund to propagate certain “values” and thus seek protectionism from the courts or through legislation is acting in hypocrisy to freedom, free choice and freedom of the individual conscious mind to decide for self.  Not to mention that it’s the same behavior they are accusing the ACLU of doing – forcing opinions and behavior onto society!

In so much as your personal choice does not infringe on a personal choice of another without consent – without contract – without agreement, it’s not the governments business, nor mine, nor yours. In free markets we call this: choice.  

If you are asking courts and legislators to favor your religion, your definition of marriage, or any other social agenda for which you disagree about the free choice of another American, you live in hypocrisy toward freedom itself.  

No one should be listening to or be lectured by an organization that seeks its own personal agenda antithetical to freedom of the individual all the while demonizing the ACLU or any other organization.

Both organizations need to clean up their acts. 

The Alliance Defense Fund can start that self-evaluation leading to self-correction (long before the ACLU ever will) by seeking to get government out of our lives, out of marriage, out of religion, out of education, out of abortion, out of health care and all other social issues where government has no business.  Do that and it takes away the weapon of hypocrisy that liberals easily wield at Republicans.   Unless, of course, demanding favor for subjective ideology, overstepping the Constitution and insisting others believe as they believe, is their goal

With this kind of thinking, Conservatives are fast becoming liberals with religion – and guess what? People are onto the scam. 

Limited government, personal & fiscal responsibility, safety of the nation – no one can argue these foundations who does not reveal himself anti-American. 

If the ADF wants to fight battles, then fight the battle for equality of freedom by getting government out of it all so that free people can make free choices and stop looking for endorsements from government.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

MOMENTS OF INSPIRATION! ZACH PRUNER - 12 YEAR OLD HERO!


THE VIDEO SAYS IT ALL!
 
A GREAT HERO TO A GREAT MANY FAMILIES. CONGRATS ZACH, OUR NATION AND OUR WORLD NEED MORE CITIZENS JUST LIKE YOU!
 
CHEERS!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

EMOTION VS. FACT

EMOTION VS. FACT
Republicans are missing an important fact that happens to be on their side when discussing the economy, the market, jobs, how best to manage the dollar, et.al.
 
Democrats argue their emotions; Republicans argue their facts and figures. So why aren't Republicans making the point that Dems aren't interested in facts, they're interested in what "feels good"? There is no tangible measure for emotion. You can scale it from 1 - 10, but emotion will always be subjective, offering nothing of fact.
 
Now, don’t let this idea gather complacency for you, Republicans do the same thing when it comes to social issues they have “passion” about (read: emotion) verses what reality is (facts).
 
Republicans are so great about self-evaluation and self-correction. This author sent Michael Steele an email months ago supporting the idea of discussing how best to approach the manipulations of democrats, only to be ignored. You may ask, why should Steele care what you have to say? For this reason: if you want to disarm your opponent, you must have regard for reality, even the realities you’re not comfortable with. You must own the reality before you and seek solutions, not emotions. Free market solutions can manage social issue conflicts but it will never happen as long as government is involved and Republicans are ideologically blind, ill informed and short sighted to their own personal agendas. Own your reality.
 
Recently the Stupak Amendment was being touted as some “victory” for Conservatives, Republicans and those of us who would like to see government out of abortion. Problem: if the amendment had not passed, then the Dems who were very concerned about government funding abortions would have likely voted “nay” on HR3962, thus stalling the government takeover of healthcare.
 
Being ideologically blind to your emotions will lead to misinterpretation of reality. It also leads to justifications, excuses and rationalizations for choices made in the face of what reality is showing you: that which is observable. If pundits would start pointing out that Dems are arguing emotion instead of facts, they’d get the upper hand. You can’t argue a person’s opinion – it’s subjective. You can argue a person’s facts if they are inaccurate.
 
If you get your house in order regarding other social issues and the emotion they carry for you, then you are able to own reality and argue with Dems on factual and practical solutions created through the creativity and innovation of free markets; music to our ears.
 
Stupak was stupid. Republicans were misguided by voting for it. With the exception of Congressman John Shadegg, who voted “present” in protest of the bill, but still standing for life & government out of abortion.
 
For more on this and other subjects with solid solutions, check out my book and interview regarding what ICONIC FREEDOM is really all about.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

GREG'S INTERVIEW WITH TERRY GILBERG ON KFYI AM 550 PHX, AZ

 
 
 
 

 
 
THIS INTERVIEW IS WITH TERRY GILBERG ON KFYI AM 550 HERE IN PHOENIX, AZ
 
YOU CAN PURCHASE THE BOOK AT http://stores.lulu.com/iconicfreedom
 
CHECK OUT MY BLOGSPOT http://iconicfreedom.blogspot.com/
 
TERRY'S WEBSITE IS http://www.terrygilberg.com/   LISTEN TO TERRY EVERY SAT/SUN ON KFYI
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE TERRY GILBERG SHOW

Listen to KFYI, AM 550 in Phoenix on Sunday, Nov. 1st from 7-8pm (streams on the web - AZ does not do daylight savings time)

I'll be on the Terry Gilberg Show discussing the latest topics and my book - ICONIC FREEDOM!

Here's the link: http://stores.lulu.com/iconicfreedom
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

ON THE ISSUES: LEGALIZING DRUGS

Are people really getting upset over the potential of marijuana being legal?

People huff paint and toxic fumes from household cleaners.    

Adjudicated kids I worked with used to drink Nyquil, vomit the syrup and walk around high for hours – they were called Nyquil parties. All available over the counter.

People drink and have alcohol available to them 24 hours a day – ever been to Vegas?  They have an open bottle policy!  Where’s the outrage!  Where’s the contempt!  Call the Mayor!

Are you really this naive?   

If the problem is concern that people will “do more of it”, so what? 

The concern is always that one behavior is a gateway to other behaviors.  

It must be assumed then that drinking water leads to alcoholism. 

When people think it's the "other guy" who is too irresponsible to make choice for self, you can count on the accuser being the one who is just as irresponsible; it used to be called: projection.

Who cares if someone wants to take drugs?  It’s not your life to decide for another.  If safety is your concern, you have to face reality that at any point in time lots of people are walking around the world high as a kite.

If you really want to make sure that certain jobs, where accuracy is most important when it comes to the responsibility of another’s life, make policy for those jobs within those companies that a daily drug test is required.  

Frankly, it’s not a bad idea to have pilots take a drug test or alcohol breathalyzer test before getting in the cockpit, but no one seems to be worried about that.  Nor is it out of reach to have health care workers test for drugs; I went to school with a nurse who was a recovering drug addict and work was where she got her “loot”.  Her stories of rampant drug abuse were shocking. 

Police, military and any other number of official positions carry weapons aren’t given such tests on a daily or hourly basis, but the law of averages tells you that at least some of those people are high on something.   Folks don’t check-in to rehab not for nothin'.

Trying to control behavior is like trying to herd cats.  Responsibility compels those who make choice to be able to respond to the choice.  If drug use is such a concern then compel companies with high-risk jobs to demand regular and frequent drug tests, and then get out of the way.  That's how free markets work: demand and supply.

Reality is that everyone has distaste for everyone else’s behavior and choices, be assured of that.  Trying to control behavior of others only reveals you as arrogant, controlling, and manipulative and eventually, a hypocrite as your choices will show incongruence.

Start questioning yourself as to why you are so concerned. Where is freedom and personal responsibility?

Is it about your children? 

Who then is responsible for teaching their children the consequences for such choices? 

Can you police your child’s every choice?  No.  You can arm them with as much information as possible and accept the risk you took by having a child to begin with. If this comment offends you, consider reality: you chose to have a child knowing the world around you.  Attempting to control others for your personal comfort?  Society doesn't exist for you.

Unless you are planning on following your kid around 24 hours, then you better make certain you teach your children what development of personal responsibility is all about.   It would be in your self-interest to teach accountability, responsibility and outcomes.

Consider how much information is available to you as an adult that you never look up, research or inquire about before making choices which could clearly alter your life.  You're not teaching that negligence to your kids, are you?

If you’re willing to take the risk of indulging in drugs, alcohol, and the like, no freedom loving American would stop you.  

The difference in any choice is that it is only made with the consent of those with whom it affects.  Don't make a choice you can't respond to.

If it doesn’t affect you, why do you care so much?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

RICHARD CHENEY AT KEEP AMERICA SAFE DINNER


Richard Cheney's full speech at the Keep America Safe dinner. Visit KeepAmericaSafe.com
 
The Bush Administration kept information safe for the BO administration to utilize in March 2009; their efforts were appreciated by the BO administration lying that the Bush administration did nothing and BO had to start from scratch.
 
Rahm, have you no shame, you trog!
 
This is called LYING, people! This isn't misspeaking, error, mistake, this is LYING and taking cover.
 
How many times will this president lie before ALL of America gets it. How loud does this have to get before you get it!
 
With 62% of Americans trusting McChrystal instead of the administration... (source: foxnews poll)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

ANITA DUNN - POT, THIS IS KETTLE; YOU'RE BLACK!


While Republicans have their issues to self-correct, Democrats are the ones who have shoved an agenda of ideology down the throats of Americans by thinking they know what light bulbs we should buy, what cars we should drive, what food we should eat, what health care we should purchase...
 
Ideology is thinking you know the choice that others should make for themselves in this life; as if you know best.
 
Ideology is antithetical to freedom, free choice and freedom of the conscious mind to decide for self how this life should be lived.
 
Ideology is control and manipulation; control of choice and manipulation of information for self-interest.
 
If liberal means maximizing freedom, then liberal Democrats are anything but liberal!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

ICONIC FREEDOM SPEAKS WITH JESSE KELLY RUNNING FOR CONGRESS CD8 - TUCSCON, AZ


 
 
Better words were never spoken of a true patriot, a man who served our nation in the military protecting our freedoms and who wants to continue that fight for freedom in our nation's capitol!
 
Make a contribution, help send Jesse Kelly to congress.
 
A donation of $10 by thousands of Americans can create the type of funding needed to elect Jesse.
 
If you're looking for someone who gets what limited government, safety of the nation and fiscal responsibility are all about - this is the patriot to vote for!
 
You don't need to be a resident of Arizona to support Jesse Kelly's efforts.
 
Let's roll!
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

BANK OF THIS AMERICA, OR NOT?

 
 

Is this Bank really a bank representative of America?

This issue regarding the flag display isn’t just some emotional dust up that some may want to allocate and dismiss in order to move on.

Do you really need to tell your staff about respect for the American flag?

Perhaps that’s more revealing, your error in hiring individuals who need to be told this?

The reality to focus on:  What has Bank of America revealed about itself as a corporation who enjoys the freedoms of America and the free market capitalistic system for over 100 years by which it has benefitted?

There is no “mistake” or “misunderstanding” – there is only choice.  

One choice over the other – either you respect the flag and proudly display it and encourage the same, or you do not.

An error in choice speaks to you about the importance of  paying attention to your choice to begin with and before making it.

In a free nation we uphold the freedom of speech, either in word or action.  Both reveal the nature of an individual.  We don’t need “apologies” to coddle our “feelings” – we observe, understand, and act.

Some in America have overreached, thinking that their personal emotional opinions about America are facts by which they choose action from within their position of power, reflecting an Anti-American stance.  Where did the branch manager get this idea of corporate policy?

Freedom upholds an individual’s right to do so.  Freedom also upholds Americans to act in a contrary manner by which to send a message of strong intolerance to that individual’s choice.

You’re free to have your speech and Americans are free to respond.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

THE WIZARD OF ODDS

When the Wizard of Oz was approached by Dorothy and friends, he seemed ominous, larger than life, he spoke with the fires of brimstone, the domination of a giant, and he commanded the will of others.  When the curtain was pulled back, clearly he was an old man, who dressed not so fashionably, stuttered and stammered, catching his groove once in a while to impart wisdom.  And in the end he was nothing more than a snake oil salesman with a basket & balloon that even he didn’t know how to control.

Obama acts like the Wizard, tall on all kinds of antics, pyrotechnics, loquacious rhetoric, deep resonance, and in the end, the curtain gets pulled back and he’s nothing more than a stammering snake oil salesman who can’t function without his teleprompter or pointing his fingers.

When the characteristics of freedom live within you, little is needed in preparation to speak before large gatherings, exchange quips with other Americans, joke with the media or plan for interviews.  

When the characteristics of freedom live within you, there is a natural flow of language that speaks to reality, avoids manipulation, aims to clarify, is rooted in genuine honesty, and resonates like a fine cello that knows the path of a musical crescendo in concert with Americans.

Obama was the dream of some and the nightmare of so many. 

He has revealed his true, natural self.  And while he may think himself confident & stalwart, he is instead, narcissistic, histrionic, arrogant and insecure. 

He seeks disdain of others rather than acknowledgement of differences. 

He espouses discourse rather than discussion. 

He implies racism rather than pluralism. 

He avoids personal responsibility in every speech, every interview, and every quip he makes. 

He seeks cover for himself at the expense of others. 

He deflects, distracts and shows contempt for those who do not adore, obey or subjugate.

Obama hasn’t become a joke, he always was a joke, it just took longer for some to realize, than others. 

He was always shallow, never of substance. 

Whatever his true intentions, they aren’t about loving this nation, in sickness & in health, for better or worse. 

His is a deep rooted pattern of disease mindedness, that from his own self-loathing and self-hatred, attempts to destroy the esteem of this nation, like the parent who tries to destroy a child’s spirit.

Obama made the error of thinking that the nation didn’t have the fortitude, strength, power, ability, esteem and pride to talk back to him; to face him down, to not be bullied.

Obama made the error of thinking that Americans loved him more than the country.

Obama was wrong.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

ON THE ISSUES: THE VALUE OF LIFE

How do you decide the value of life?

Where did you derive your ideas regarding the value of life?
 
The answer to these two questions will become the basis for this discussion.

ALL LIFE IS EQUAL
 
Recently the uproar over another czar of Obama’s is making a similar stance, but, as usual, the understanding of this statement is distorted and Sunstein’s mind walks off the map.
 
Stick with me here.
 
The value of life is similar to the free market system.
 
In a free market system we each decide the value of something, as a result, we take action of replacing the dollars in our pockets with the service or product we would rather have. This is a free and voluntary contract.
 
Life, any life, is the same.
 
I make my case by the following examples:
 
* You value your life more than Jihad, so you’d take Jihad’s life
* You value a cow or chicken less than your dog, so you butcher and eat them.
* You value a wild deer less than your pet cat, so you hunt it down and eat it.
 
Still not convinced? Okay, how about some of these personally placed values:
 
* I value my family’s lives more than my friends’ lives.
* I value my friends’ lives more than my neighbors’ lives.
* I value my neighbors’ lives more than an unknown American’s life.
* I value an unknown American’s life more than I value a foreigner’s life.
* I value a foreigner’s life more than I value an animal’s life.
* I value an animal’s life more than a plant’s life.
* I value a plant’s life more than a bacteria’s life.

Life begins at conception.
 
The value placed on that life is subjective, meaning personal opinion, by you the individual placing the value you’ve decided. This upholds your freedom to value this life much more than say someone across the world, that doesn’t.
 
We take life every day for safety, sustenance, sport, disregard or comfort.
 
How we decide the taking of that life is predicated on your philosophy. To make the assumption that the value of life is endowed through spiritual philosophy is to negate those who utilize no such beliefs but still uphold the value and regard for life; value is not exclusive to a party or philosophy. If you want to utilize a spiritual philosophy no one would infringe on your rights of that choice, however, you don’t need spiritual beliefs to have regard for life.
 
Some people have a presumption of "existence", however, this again is personal and subjective. To impose such presumption onto others infringes on their personal freedom of thought. You don't want to be told what to believe and neither do others.
 
We decide as a society that we want to favor our own species and of course we would – it’s probably a good idea since we want to continue the human race.
 
Every species favors its own. Of course, we subjectively decide which of our species’ life we take in war, in abortion, in defense, in anger. However, the value we place on each life is purely subjective to the individual.
 
The statement that a “dog engages in rational thought more” than a baby, well, to some degree is true because a baby can’t live on its own or fend for itself, but we favor the baby and hold higher value to the baby, which again, to me and you makes perfect sense – we favor our own species, why wouldn’t we. As a society we understand the vulnerability of the baby who cannot take care of itself. Again, very logical.
 
This discussion is so important in the dialogue regarding the value of life and abortion. While we would like to see abortions reduced greatly in our society, unfortunately, reality tells us that some women have not developed personal responsibility to the extent that they aren’t using abortion as contraception.

One great step forward toward this reduction is to stop having pluralistic tax dollars funding abortions.
 
Let those who want to have this option or who agree with this choice, fund the clinics that would provide such a service. In this way nobody pays for something they don’t agree with until we move past this.
 
Another great step is to let the free markets create educational centers funded by individuals and corporations where women could go to get counseling, education, learn ALL the options available to them in order to support them moving to developing personal responsibility.
 
Yet one more option is to create a network of mom’s who can swap out babysitting time so that women who find themselves having an unexpected expectancy, can still work and trade some of their time-off babysitting with other moms and eliminate the need for welfare because these women will be working. They may struggle and have challenges, but society cannot absolve them of their choices or save them from the reality they created through their choices.
 
Free markets can support solutions. 
 
When we educate people they move closer and closer to accurate choices.
 
How do we know these choices are accurate? The choices are upholding freedom, having regard for life, and accepting personal responsibility for each choice, having the ability to respond to each choice, all the while making their choice at no cost to others who didn’t consent.
 
One trap you don’t want to fall into is the trap of applying morality of your value to the greater society.
 
Morality is like value placed: personal opinion.
 
When you start arguing it, you’re really just arguing whose opinion is valued more. Well, obviously, each person thinks his opinion is more valuable. It’s circular and useless. You can't "prove" an opinion is fact, if you did, then it's a fact and not arguable.
 
It’s more powerful to debate freedom – there is no capitulating freedom, either someone is for freedom or they are not. Unmasking their need for control will dismantle the attempt to control and reveal who they are.
 
You’ll gain more solid footing by upholding freedom, and then look to how free society in a free market can come up with great answers regarding the personal issues that each of us places value and would like some resolution.

All done in the name of freedom – ICONIC FREEDOM!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

...AND OBAMA, YOUR 15 MINUTES ARE UP!

 President Obama had an opportunity last night to show leadership, uphold freedom and endorse the freedom of other Americans.

Instead he, his staff and complicit gop cowards, decided to subjugate.

The president had a moment to say, “Congressman, I understand you disagree. We can debate these specifics and I look forward to it. Thank you for being outspoken” But he didn’t.

To the other members booing the Congressman, the president could’ve said, “Please don’t admonish an American for exercising his right to free speech. We are fortunate enough to live in a nation where public and private discourse is encouraged and embraced – we silence no speech, we silence no American.” But he didn’t.

This morning he could have said, “The Congressman has no need to apologize. I am not in fear of hearing free speech by any American in this nation, in fact, I encourage and uphold such freedom. The congressman made his position known and I welcome the opportunity to debate the facts of the bill to clear up any confusion either on my part or the Congressman’s.” but he didn’t’.

But all of these responses require confidence, lack of arrogance, and patriotism.

Instead, he does as he always does: demands subjugation, elevates himself above others, showed contempt and anger for another American’s right to free speech and appeared like a victim which is his typical modus operandi.

I'm waiting for someone to call the Congressman's comment, racism - wait for it, I'm sure it's got to be coming.

There is no standard for discourse in this nation – that is one of this nation’s strengths – we don’t define how another should live his life, the choices he should make.

Anyone thinking they have a standard, by which everyone else should live, will make a target for your own back, for the day will come when you transgress another’s standard and will be forced to subjugate – and neither of these scenarios upholds freedom itself.

How is it that you think yourself elevated above others in order to tell them how they should live, the choices they should make, the way to behave, what is acceptable and what is not? Who died and left you in charge? Arrogance - plain and simple!

Why do you have a need to control?

Freedom or Control – which side are you on?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

ON THE ISSUES: RACISM CREATES BRAIN FREEZE

The indefensible accusation of racism creates brain freeze to the person it is heaved at, and why?

The average American citizen understands our history and has moved away from racism, most especially the type of racism my father and my grandfather grew up with. In most circles people find it quite repulsive and distasteful to listen to racial remarks about others.

Comics make jokes about race and people laugh, why? Because the jokes are based on truth, placed in the context of a "comedy club", where we are willing to admit it.

Let’s have a reality check. There are aspects about a person we sometimes don’t like – your eyes, your hair color, your height, your weight and maybe somewhere in there, your race. So what? Should we call you a “folicalist” if you dislike the color or style of someone’s hair? Should we label you an “eyeist” because you dislike the color or shape of someone’s eyes?

Yet, instant brain freeze when someone says, “you’re racist”. We shut down. We have no evidence to refute such an accusation. It’s like trying to prove love exists, you can’t – because it’s a personal experience.

Racism is a personal subjective experience, often used as deflection & distraction, with attempts to silence the opposition, appear like a victim and advance a personal agenda. The individual who uses racism seeks to hype up emotions so no one is paying attention to what is really going on.

Why would a person choose the experience of being offended?

Don’t gloss over that question.

Why would a person choose the experience of being offended?

What is a person trying to do when they throw out the charge of racism?

Racism exists in the mind of the one who needs it to portray himself as victimized – he wants something for nothing. There is an ulterior motive. It has been so misused at this point it has little effect except to reveal the tantrum of the individual who tosses that emotional Molotov-cocktail into a conversation.

The charge of racism is a deflection from reality.

When Representative Charlie Rangle (D-NY) was pressured because of his misdeeds financially, he finally threw down the race card when all reality pointed to his unethical behavior and no other response he was giving was getting him out of it.

When Governor Patterson (D) of New York recently was pressured because of his poor policies and even poorer performance since being thrust into his position, threw down the race card in the face of reality.

When the no-talent Janeane Garofolo had no other means by which to slander the actions of other Americans having their voices heard during the Tea Parties, she throws down the race card.

When Obama supporters saw my sign of Obama as the Joker along with the label of Socialism, one protester walked up and asked me, “Don’t you think that’s racist?” and of course I replied, “No, but the fact that you just asked me that question, is racist”.

What filter is that person seeing the world through?

Racism is in the mind of the beholder.

By the way, the Joker poster reflects the fake smile hiding the sinister intent. It has nothing to do with his race.

Why would a person looking at it think of race, first?

One incident after another always reveals that the person making the accusation simply wants to distract and deflect.

Why do they find it necessary to go down that road and insult a person’s race?

Insult? You didn’t know that someone calling you racist is an insult to THEIR race? Oh, let me explain.

The accusation of racism is utilized as victimization of the individual. Empowering victimization is implicitly saying that the individual is too stupid or cannot be trusted to figure out how to manage any challenge placed before him. He’s weak. He’s incapable. He needs an excuse.

To call someone a victim is to empower that individual toward irresponsibility. To give him a credit card that lacks personal accountability and personal responsibility for “charges” made. He no longer has to own his choices or is compelled to have to respond to his choices because “he’s a victim”.

Poor you. Poor pitiful you.

Yes, some people end up in some extremely unfortunate circumstances. Calling them a victim insults them. To think you know better how another should live his life or the choices he should make is to elevate yourself.

I don’t know about you, but, most people see that as an insult.

Compare the examples of those who seek no special treatment when circumstances created challenges in their lives to which they acted toward their own personal success to overcome those challenges.

The best way to quiet down the racism charge is to simply say, “I understand you feel that way, and the point you wanted to make is?” or “Now, why do you want to go down that road?”

Who put it into that person’s head what racism is, to begin with?

The person making the claim needs to define what racism is, in doing so; they corner themselves into the abyss of personal experience which is not a credential or evidence of accusation.

Charging racism shows how the individual is attempting to silence that which he doesn’t want to hear, unmasks his martyrdom and attempts to appear like a victim to the extortion of others – trying to get something for nothing. Why else would a person call something you just said, racist?

If a person were racist, isn’t the observation of such a person and choosing to walk away, enough of a resolution? Unless….you’re trying to get something for nothing.

What does it give you to hold onto your victimization, to be defined by it, to utilize it as your biography in life?

Whatever happened to: sticks & stones may break my bones…
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123Next »