Our Borders Are Our Last Line of Defense

Our skin is the best defense our body has against outside infection, germs and disease. That is why we put Band-Aids over cuts and bandages over wounds. We clean and doctor them and try to fix any cut or abrasion. Even a tiny splinter gets our immediate attention. When our defense system is compromised and we seek to correct it right away. Prolonging or especially ignoring that, we are left open to all forms of complications, some even life-threatening.

The border that surrounds the United States of America, is America's skin. When it is breached and open, we are in the same danger as a country as we are in when our personal skin is cut as a human being.

Our southern border is being assaulted as a test to our resolve to defend ourselves and our way of life. It has become a polarizing issue and a confusing and a complicated one when really it is very basic.

When the president Bill Clinton called for stricter immigration laws and tighter borders he was applauded and got a standing ovation. Obama spoke of immigrant children crossing our borders and he said, “Send them back.” Hillary spoke of strengthening our borders. No one disagreed and everyone approved. Then comes the stain of politics.

Enter 2018, and the “Not My President,” as they call him, Donald Trump seeks to remedy the situation and he is called a racist, bigot, and a heartless monster.

Obama used pepper spray to force aggressive immigrants back from the border and we hear not a peep from the media or the global community. President Trump uses tear gas after barrages of rocks are thrown at Border Agents and crowds rush the border, and he is accused of cruelly assaulting women and children. (Incidentally, reporters to the scene report that the men, which comprise most of the caravan, forced women and children to the forefront as human shields as they attacked.)

Thousands have arrived at the border to California and even the Tijuana city government does not want them there. Bemoaning the fact that it costs that city over $30,000 a day to house, care and pick up after them as they trash the town, they just want them gone.

It has been reported that about one-third of the immigrants have medical conditions such as lice, drug addiction or communicable diseases dangerous to the public at large. Maladies such as TB, syphilis, gonorrhea, leprosy, and an ever-changing list of current threats like polio, cholera, diphtheria, smallpox, or severe acute respiratory syndromes are a fact. HIV has even been found in several among those now at the border. Chris Cabrera, a Southern Texas Border Patrol agent warns us: "What's coming over into the US could harm everyone. We are starting to see scabies, chicken pox, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections, and different viruses."

When people attempt to immigrate to America the correct way, they undergo medical screenings in their home country before they are allowed into this country. If they fail, they aren’t allowed to come. That is another reason the uninvited thousands making up these caravans are so dangerous. We don’t have a clue what they are carrying medically speaking nor what their intentions are once they arrive, as in the case of MS-13 and other brutal gangs who have infiltrated the caravan.

These are diseases many of which we have eradicated from America over the years and they are being reintroduced into a population which has not been vaccinated for them. This is not just a political issue, but a safety and national security issue.

Thousands more are on their way, so the situation is not even close to being resolved. This is a very important test for America and this Trump administration. Even the UN weighs in on the issue and demands we let them in.

Europe is seeing the negative effects of their open borders with crime, rapes and murders but they are too stubborn to admit they need to change their open-border policies. Some countries are getting the message, but sadly, not all of them.

The Democrats are shaping the debate instead of having any commonsense discussions about immigration. Historically, most immigrants vote for Democratic Party, perhaps because they think that the term “Democratic” means they stand for Democracy and America, when those of us who live here, and who pay attention to their deceptive actions and words, know differently.

It was once said that “The truth is a lion that does not need to be defended; just let it out and it will defend itself.” I hope that is true, but daily I see evidence that the truth is scoffed at, maligned, ridiculed and given unfair labels that tag it as being anything but the truth.

The truth always seems to take a back seat to an agenda of one kind or another and instead of logic and sensible debate, everything devolves into name-calling and outright dismissals because of alleged claims of racism, bigotry, supremacism, Islamophobia, homophobia, xenophobia or whatever other term they choose to use at the moment to stifle and smother the conversation. Such terms remind me of children who put their fingers in their ears while saying, “na-na-na-na-na” so they won’t be able to hear what you are saying. Childishness is truly an appropriate word these days.

If they can’t debate the message, and they usually can’t, they attack the messenger and label him or her negatively so they can declare they are not worth listening to. A successful tactic that all too often works, but it is like cutting off your nose to spite your face. It is counter-productive to the expanse of the truth and of information we, as concerned Americans, need to know.

In an ideal world, politics and agendas would take second seat to truth, honesty and what is good for Americans and people in general. But I guess that utopia will never arrive, even though Liberals actually think that if we all thought like they did, it would be a paradise. But remember, even Paradise had a serpent bent on destroying the work of God, so how do we ever expect to stand a chance of preserving the America God helped design and create, when we can’t recognize the serpent for what it is?

Are We Seeing "Fire Jihad" in California?

Are We Seeing “Fire Jihad” in California?

Just as the calls for more gun control are the result of every mass shooting as regular as clockwork, a new fire, or tornado, hurricane or any other normal weather activity, increases the surge of calls for more money and effort to be put into climate change, the most popular wealth distribution ploy seen in recent years.

When I was in high school the greatest fear was the coming ice age, which of course never materialized. Now it is Global Warming and the disasters that man has caused and will continue to cause, if you believe the official storyline.

Everything that happens now is blamed on climate change (the adopted term because global warming didn’t cover enough scenarios and limited the eco-terrorist’s agenda).

In spite of its many flaws, the “science” of climate change has been relegated to the bin of junk science. Yet, many still tout it as the greatest threat known to man. And, as it always does, to adopt a myopic, narrow view of anything, always becomes a filter that hides the truth. It pays to look at what is right in front of our eyes.

On a daily basis, the fires in California demand our attention as they spread and continue to destroy much of our national and natural forests. Few disasters destroy as much as wildfires which are so hard to contain, much less eradicate. And of course, according to the Liberal mindset, is caused by man-made climate change.

They may be half right, the “man-made” half anyway. Yet, here is a theory few want to consider because of the tendency to excuse actions of militant Islamists and radical Muslims without honest consideration.

As most would have you believe, the term “jihad” is basically a doctrine referring to an inner inspection and a spiritual awakening and introspection. In reality, only 3% of Islamic jihad deals with that benign perspective while 97% of all cases and instruction deals with overt, outward assaults upon the “infidel,” or non-Muslim, who denies the deity of Allah and the Prophethood of Muhammad.

Besides the Qur’an and the life of Muhammad as a guide to determine Muslim behavior, Islamic instruction also comes from modern clerics in the form of fatwas, which range from how to live an acceptable Islamic life, to direct calls for jihad against non-Muslims, especially Israel and the West, specifically the United States.

The tactic I refer to is “jihad by arson.” The principle has been around for years but only recently has it gained popularity, perhaps because of its ease of operation and its effectiveness and the fact that it rarely points fingers at Islam itself.

On October 27, 2011, this fatwa was issued by Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi: “Every Muslim should participate and contribute in sabotaging the economies of the Crusader states, whether this is through economic boycott or by targeting their property with vandalism and arson.”

This fatwa calls for the direct participation of all Muslims to conduct jihad in this manner. We tend to label this the rants of an extremist and in so doing we choose to dismiss his commands. But It has been acted upon since its issuance.

As far back as 2007 jihadis have claimed credit for starting California wildfires. A G2 bulletin reported a post which stated, “this is an invitation to the Muslims of Europe and America, Australia and Russia to burn forests.” Could it be any clearer than that?

A video by Abu Mus’ab al Suri circulated around that time which advocated for the setting of forest fires as a tactic of jihad.

As far back as 2003 an FBI memo warned law enforcement officials when it said a detainee affiliated with Al-Qaida had bragged about masterminding a plot to set forest fires in the western United States.

Fast forward to today and we are seeing the greatest devastation by forest fires in history. The fatwa called for an assault on the economy and almost $3 billion of damage has occurred already and millions have been spent on fighting the fires. To date 7,579 separate fires are burning and 1,667,855 acres have been destroyed. Over 80 confirmed dead and over 1,000 still missing and unaccounted for.

Do we really think that so many fires happening all at the same time is a coincidence? Honestly can this all be blamed on climate change? Is that even plausible?

Of course, it is not plausible, but that story is far easier to believe and defend than to examine the possibility that perhaps, just perhaps, Islamic assault is being taken against us in unprecedented ways.

Israel was possibly the proving ground for this tactic as was evidenced by five sperate fires in five different neighborhoods in Israel all burning at the same time back in 2012 and many since. Another coincidence?

In a July 2012 news report, hundreds of fires were burning in Jerusalem and the surrounding forest areas. Two Arabs were arrested in that case.

A recently released statement read: “O America. This is the punishment of bombing Muslims in Syria. This is Allah’s punishment for you. And in shaa Allah (Allah willing), you will see more fires. Praise be to Allah.”

An ISIS inspired magazine reported, “incendiary attacks have played a significant role in modern and guerrilla warfare, as well as in “lone wolf” terrorism.” It claimed a fire at a furniture factory in Russia and other wildfires in Israel as events that “demonstrated the lethality of such an effortless operation.”

Yes, setting fires is easy and effective and a go-to tool now that Islamic extremists see as viable and effective. Unfortunately, there is little we can do to stop it either.

So, any intelligent person might ask, are these 7,500 plus fires a result of a coordinated effort to follow Islamic fatwas and burn America to the ground? Can we not at least investigate this possibility without making blanket excuses of denials without honest evaluation and consideration? Sometimes our worst fears, the ones we refuse to acknowledge, do confront us and only by addressing them honestly can we ever defend ourselves and protect what is precious to us, whether Politically Correct or not.

The Left's Mid-Term Election Hypocrisy

The Left’s Mid-Term Election Hypocrisy

While the term “Blue Wave” was on every newscaster’s and Liberal pundit’s lips leading up to the mid-term election earlier this month, the reality was far from a wave, perhaps more of a splash.

For a year now, Democrats have been blasting Republicans and Conservatives by calling them, "deplorables" (by Hillary Clinton), "dregs of society" (by Joe Biden), Nazis (by Nancy Pelosi) and racists, bigots, Islamophobes, sexists, xenophobes and homophobes and more by almost all of them. Democrat Congresswoman Maxine Waters has openly called for the public harassment of Republicans at restaurants, stores, parking lots or any place they might be encountered. She believes, as do many other Democrats, that Republicans are true enemies of state and she wants them treated as such. Some such encounters have already happened due to her incitement.

And that Blue Wave that was supposed to be an affirmation that millions of Americans believed that way also, just didn't happen.

Democrats won 20 seats in the House. Not really much of a wave. In the 2010 midterms, Republicans took 63 seats. That could be considered a wave next to the Blue ripple we recently saw.

American voters have shown that the Left’s falsehoods and misleading tactics are not to be believed or validated and their attacks upon President Trump, Republicans and Conservatives, say more about them than it does about those they attack.

Among some of their victories that they took great stock in were: Ayanna Pressley became the first Black congresswoman from Massachusetts. Jarod Polis won the governorship in Colorado making him the first openly Gay governor in the United States. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez became the youngest woman ever elected to Congress. Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar became the first Muslim women elected to Congress.

All these are legitimate victories in their own right. But you may notice they were all Democrats. Liberals are quick to applaud victory by a woman, Muslim, Gay, Transgender, Black, overt Socialist, or almost any other category of individual who wears a label they endorse. They call for more “women of color” to be elected as evidence of a great progressive move forward. But in their minds, some things simply cross the line of acceptable tolerance.

Strangely absent from all the accolades was Young Kim, who became the first Korean-American woman to be elected in Congress. Why the omission? Simple, she happens to be a Republican. It matters little that she was a “first” or for that matter a woman. They feel being a Republican nullifies all of that.

During the election cycle of Barack Obama, anyone who did not vote for him, no matter the reason, was labeled a racist. It was par for the course. People who did not vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016 were labeled sexist, even though there may have been a hundred reasons not to vote for her, and her sex had nothing to do with any of them.

But when it comes to Republicans, it matters little if you are a woman, even though they clamor for more women in politics. You’ll be ridiculed and smeared, as was Sarah Palin in 2016. It matters little if you are Black if you are Republican. You’ll be labeled an “Uncle Tom, a “sell out” or traitor to their race. After all, Democrat votes for Ben Carson or Herman Cain were hard to come because being Black in their cases suddenly didn’t advance the prejudice of their narrative.

So, what happens now that the Democrats will resume some power in January? Will they, as Hillary Clinton promised, bring civility back to politics? Don’t count on it. Power only feeds their aggression and Nancy Pelosi has already vowed to heighten the search for more evidence to impeach President Trump with, ever being the obstructionist, she and her party members have proudly become.

We can only hope they will not continue the nonsense they have become known for, and will cease the attacks on the other side of the aisle in favor of working for America. Perhaps they’ll stop trying to prove that Hillary’s loss was due to then-candidate Donald Trump’s corruption efforts or collusion with Russia. Perhaps they will even remember they are Americans and do something positive like, you know, their job of working FOR America. That would be a refreshing change. Oh well, hope springs eternal.

Masculinity Under Attack

Masculinity Under Attack

Feminism used to be a movement to help project women ahead, to advance their aspirations and dreams, to make possible what had been unobtainable for them in prior times. Now it has become a weapon to destroy the influence and importance of men in general. The idea of masculinity was its first casualty.

It has become normal to imagine that a man should express no level of autonomy or power that has always been considered a masculine trait.

Hollywood, through its sitcoms and commercials, has emasculated men and turned them into morons who can’t think for themselves. A show like “Father Knows Best” would never make it today. Rather, we have the Al Bundy’s and Homer Simpsons who are anything but father figures that help shape their children’s lives in a positive manner.

Effeminate Gay men seem to be a part of every sitcom and their femininity far exceeds their masculinity, as if it is the desired new norm, or at least that is the reality Hollywood would have us embrace.

TV commercials present men as bungling idiots who clean fish on wooden countertops, measure their kitchen for cabinets using their shoe, and don’t know how to dress for a first date. Once you begin to notice it, you’ll see this tendency exhibited in commercials by companies like Sling TV, American Express, Lowe’s, Clorox, Progressive Insurance and The Hartford.

Why do advertisers think that they can sell products by degrading men? Because women respond to ads more than men do, they are less concerned with the way men are portrayed. But does making a man look like a loser make a woman buy more? It is a method designed to build her up by making her look like the decision maker and the sensible, sane one in the family, and tearing him down is the method they use to accomplish this. Properly targeted ads sell and portraying men as bumblers is the by-product of successful advertising.

This movement to shoddily portray men as incompetent has become politicized and to gain favor for an agenda, all you have to do is diminish the influence that men have to make your point.

The murder of Millie Tibbits is a perfect example. Murdered by an illegal alien, her case drew national attention to the challenges of illegals in America. But Liberals refuse to see the crime as reflecting in any way against people who are not legally in this country because it does not fit their agenda. So, they ignore the immigration aspect and blame her death on “toxic masculinity,” whatever that is.

Throughout history, there has always been jobs and duties thought of as typically suited for males and for females. The feminists and political correctness of today seek to change all that. School books no longer present the woman as a homemaker and mother who stayed at home and reared the kids and took care of the home but rather they seek to present her as gender neutral and assigning anything to her as “typically female,” such as ironing clothes or washing dishes, is frowned upon. Leaders see such ideas as limiting and demeaning to women. What used to be seen as honorable and necessary for women has become undesirable and sexist.

Even the use of “he” and “she” is frowned upon in an attempt to make every character in schoolbooks gender neutral. It has become absurd. Misguidedly, the use of terms like “mankind” has been labeled as offensive to the modern feminist.

In Italy, the Left Party is promoting a movement that would require men to sit when urinating. They claim that it is more hygienic for them to do so but is really a backhand way to proclaim the uncleanliness of men using public restrooms.

The LBGT community proclaims that men are not even essential any longer in the act of procreation and having a man’s influence in the household as a parent is no longer necessary in the rearing of well-balanced children. That is a whole twisted topic in itself as we see boys being taught that the male influence is of little or no value. Male role models will soon go the way of the Dodo bird.

We all know boys can be more energetic at schools than girls, who usually pride themselves in being more civil. This fact has boys being prescribed drugs for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder at a rate twice that of girls. This is seen as a viable and effective way to “control” masculine energy.

Men are being “kept in line” by the popular #METOO movement. Now it is even dangerous to give an honest compliment to a woman for fear she’ll scream harassment and you’ll lose your job and your reputation based on the accusation alone, no real facts needed, just the hint of impropriety.

In the UK, it was found that only 7% of men would offer a woman a seat on a bus because of a fear of offending them. Indeed, some women who demand to be thought of as equals, scold men who hold doors for them or offer them a seat on a crowded bus. Personally, it feels like an unfavorable consequence of feminism and women are losing out on simple acts of courtesy and respect.

A survey of 5,000 men showed that over a third of them would not offer to help a mother struggling to go up or down a set of stairs with a stroller and baby for fear of offending them. Three-quarters of men would refuse to help a woman carry a heavy bag or suitcase for the same reason.

A law was proposed in England that would make it a crime for a man to ask a woman for her phone number on a public bus, if the very act offended her. When did we become so thin-skinned? When did we begin to see every act of a man as suspect and with ill intent?

Historically, women have always seemed to appreciate the “little things” done for them by men which men view as common courtesy. In the climate of women demanding to be thought of as equals, men are now often confused and simply opt out of offering any assistance to stave off the wrath of a woman who might not appreciate the courtesy and act of simple good manners.

Men have always been seen as the “stronger sex,” so it is understandable that men should desire to aid a struggling woman, but even expressing that view riles some woman who see such assistance as offensive and patronizing. Also, that phrase implies that the woman is the “weaker sex” and now this is intolerable to declare.

Chivalry appears to be dying on a global scale.

There are a couple ways to have the best house on the block. You can dress up or paint your house, landscape the yard, add curb appeal in various ways, or you can simply burn down everyone else’s house. Feminism and the search for equality seem to prefer the later approach. Things have gone beyond a simple desire for equal pay for equal work. Often the destruction of masculinity is erroneously portrayed as necessary to accomplish equality for women.

There will always be differences between men and women, whether anyone likes it or not. Feminist seeks to eliminate the differences because to admit to them would demand we also recognize men and women for their weaknesses as well as their strengths. We were not created exactly the same and to think otherwise is delusional.

Forcing feminine traits on men to replace masculine ones seems to be their solution. Take an average man and add a dash of emotional sensitivity and the propensity to nurture and you have the ideal man. Well, not exactly.

We all know of men who could be more sensitive and understanding, who have the ability to see things through a woman’s eyes. But can this not be done without the tendency to erase masculinity altogether?

Like adding two colors together, a new and different color is created. One wasn’t enhanced, it was changed into something totally different and to think otherwise confuses everyone. Such an effort of redefining male characteristics to be more feminine does not erase undesirable “masculine” traits that some men exhibit.

A man can be a good father and an effective provider for his family and defender of them and still be considered a man. A man doesn’t have to relinquish his “manhood” to be strong for his family or community. Men have always donned that role and the very essence of a man does not have to be destroyed to make him a better human being. Today even John Wayne would have a tough time portraying his manliness without repercussions.

There are negative masculine traits, certainly. What keeps it all in balance is the attitudes of the individual. Men tend to focus on a narrow part, while feminine energy tends to focus on the whole, whether the family or the community. Women often forsake their own desires to fulfill the needs of her children or family. Actions taken to benefit others are a balance between the two, just as all of life is a balancing act.

What ever happened to the fight against negative masculine traits? Now, such actions are excused too often. Blame is placed on the economy, schoolyard or internet bullying or they have been demeaned for racial reasons. If Hitler were killing Jews today the “enlightened” among us would blame it on his rough childhood and the fact that his overbearingly “masculine” father would not allow him to pursue his love of art and painting. A “COEXIST” bumper sticker might even have his picture on it these days.

It doesn’t take the destruction of masculinity to set the world right. And any attempt to tear men down for the betterment of humanity, whether it is to portray men as abusive no-counts or as incompetent, bungling boobs, is misguided and self-defeating.

Honor masculinity. Honor femininity. Honor the differences. In attempting to destroy the differences, we are destroying what makes us uniquely human in the first place.

The NFL’s Disrespect of America is Subsidized by Us

The NFL’s Disrespect of America is Subsidized by Us

We are seeing a lot of discontent in the NFL nowadays, and all of it is not taking place on the field in the form of a kneeling player, or a pandering NFL Commissioner.

It is being seen among fans who have been loyal and entertained for decades but are getting fed up with the disrespect players are showing. Some have vowed to never watch another televised game. Others have burned the jerseys of players they used to root for. And there is good reason to be dismayed at the behavior of both the players as well as the ownership of the teams and the league.

Here is another reason for disgust you may not be aware of:

Since 1997, one finding showed, the NFL has built numerous new stadiums, aided by $7 BILLION in taxpayer money. Teams are also given discounts on municipal services like police and fire department protection and utility costs on top of that to keep them happy and local.

Two years ago, one study claimed that total might be as high as $10-12 Billion in taxpayer money being funneled to the sports entities.

Teams often get tax breaks on the money they spend on construction of these stadiums as well. Most spending is financed with tax free municipal bonds, which were originally created by Congress to help fund roads and schools. Special consideration for land and infrastructure concessions also increase their bottom line and save them millions.

In spite of this, enter Colin Kaepernick, a quarterback for the San Francisco 49ers who devolved after a few years into a player no longer in demand. His claim to fame will be his taking a kneel to protest racism and inequality in America. His protest for social injustice was soon followed by teammates and other players from other teams and has led to the dwindling support of the NFL.

Kaepernick is now unemployed looking for a team to play with and many football fans couldn’t be happier, as the majority of them never sided with him and his displays of disrespect for America. He once wore a pair of socks that depicted police as pigs, but go no reprimand from the NFL. In fact, 64% of Americans disagree with his protest with a mere 24% support him. Disrespect for America will likely never be mainstream, even though Liberals politicians of today are certainly trying to portray it as such.

So, every time you see players "take a knee" to protest civil injustice in America, they are not just expressing false outrage, they are disrespecting the police, the military, the government and President Trump. But did you ever stop to think that they are also thumbing up their nose at the benefactors of that $7-12 Billion they gladly pocket — YOU, the taxpayer!

Since this is federally collected money, a taxpayer in Hawaii may be, in effect, helping finance a new stadium in New York City, for instance, 5,000 miles away from their home, giving money they will never see a benefit from for a stadium they will unlikely ever even visit.

These subsidies go toward baseball, basketball and football entities, compounding the problem. For instance, $431 million was funneled to Yankee Stadium since 2000 alone.

Pro athletes live high-on-the-hog, as we say in the South, at the sacrifice of the very people they willingly choose to dishonor. We, the American taxpayer, are the reason for their very existence and the fabulous lifestyle they enjoy as pro athletes. In reality, you and I pay our hard-earned money so they can enjoy the life they live. Even if you are not a fan and never watch a single game, you pad their bank accounts. Add that to their total disrespect of America and its values, and there is reason for real outrage.