Wednesday, April 1, 2015


Calling all Republicans……….
Tonight is a very important night for one of our own.  Matt Snyder is being considered for the Watauga County Board of Elections Director position.  The Watauga Democrat Party has posted on their Facebook page asking their party members to attend to meeting to show support for Member Kathleen Campbell who opposes Matt.   Please come and help show support for Matt and our hard working board members.  7PM, Wednesday April 1, 2015 at the Commissioners Building on the corner of King Street and Water Street. (From party webpage)

Why I stayed in the Closet as a Conservative Until Near Retirement


Quotes from articles posted by Nobody
           Article posted by Nobody

"Personally, liberal students scare the shit out of me. I know how to get conservative students to question their beliefs and confront awful truths, and I know that, should one of these conservative students make a facebook page calling me a communist or else seek to formally protest my liberal lies, the university would have my back. I would not get fired for pissing off a Republican, so long as I did so respectfully, and so long as it happened in the course of legitimate classroom instruction.

The same cannot be said of liberal students. All it takes is one slip—not even an outright challenging of their beliefs, but even momentarily exposing them to any uncomfortable thought or imagery—and that’s it, your classroom is triggering, you are insensitive, kids are bringing mattresses to your office hours and there’s a twitter petition out demanding you chop off your hand in repentance."

Tuesday, March 31, 2015

Indiana's Religious Freedom Act is About the First Amendment

This post is my take on the brouhaha over Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act.  Those of you who have been on this blog with me for a time know that in my Christianity I want always to make the main thing the main thing. The main thing for me is what Jesus made as the main thing, and what he told his disciples to be the main thing, i.e., establish the Kingdom of Heaven. He demonstrated the Kingdom by bodies being healed and unclean spirits cast out. (Matt 10:7)

Bottom line, for me the homosexual issue is just one more example of a distraction from the main thing.

Now, having said that, back to the Indiana situation. Even the ACLU should be able to see that this is all a First Amendment thing. The Religious Freedom law was to protect people like the baker who did not want to bake a cake for a gay wedding. It offended his religious convictions. But he and the florist and soon the ministers, feel the heavy hand of the Federal government crushing down on them. Their crime? They hurt someone’s feelings.

You don’t have to be a religious person to know using the Federal government this way is wrong. You only have to be an American.

Monday, March 30, 2015

In Response to Charge I Censor

A commenter with the nom de plum Calculator, wrote at the end of his or her comment "(I realize that you and "Blogger" have a history of censoring comments on this blog, so I hope this comment makes the cut)."

 So here is my response regarding censoring.

In the first place, the only person who can block a comment is me, Blogger. For a time there was another administrator, "New Guy" but he declared a hiatus and has not been on the blog for some time. No one else can block.

I don’t censor. I don’t need to. Following are some of the reasons. In the first place I am not threatened by being exposed to Left-wing points of view. To paraphrase Beatrice Kaufman who said "I’ve been rich and I’ve been poor; rich is better," well I’ve been Liberal and I’ve been Conservative. Conservative is better.

In the second place, the natural trajectory of thinking is from Liberal into Conservative. As the saying goes ""If you are young and not liberal, then you have no heart; but if you are old and not conservative, then you have no brain," (most often attributed to Disraeli or to Churchill). Statistics are on my side. Among those who change their political stripes one time in their lifetime, more people go from Left to Right than vice versa. So, those of you now blogging from the Left will more likely be changed. It is the natural order of things.

  Now for a caveat on "I don’t censor." Years ago when I first started this blog, I was joined by a commenter calling himself "Liberal POV." After a time, one reader told me to look up the word "troll." As you probably know in Internet slang, a troll is a person "who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response [2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[3]"(Wikipedia). Liberal POV did every one of these behaviors. He was the poster boy of trolling.

At first, I thought it was good to let him keep drooling. People would see how awful someone on the Left could be. But finally after too many complaints and from the fear he would run all the serious people off, I began to block some of his comments. We psychologists do what we call "shaping" behavior by rewarding the good behavior and punishing the bad. I even told him what I was doing, hoping I could train him to be a better citizen. It did not work and readers were leaving. So I gave up and blocked him from the blog.

From time to time, he would return under aliases and more recently under Liberal POV. So, I am now back to a new strategy. If he posts something substantive and stays on point, I let it through. If he goes back to trolling, I zap him.

Bottom line, I don’t censor on this blog.

Sunday, March 29, 2015

Israeli/ Palestinian Conflict (Third time Post)

As usual Obama on the wrong side of history
From the dust jacket of the book “From Time Immemorial” by Joan Peters. “Joan Peters strikes a heavy blow against the broad consensus about ‘the Palestinians’ and the assumption that Palestinian rights are at the heart of the Arab Israeli conflict . . . From Time Immemorial supplies abundant justification for reversing the moral and legal presumptions that have cast Israel in the role of defendant before the court of world opinion.” And from the Washington Post, “A remarkable document in itself. . . . The refugees are not the problem but the excuse.”

Starting out to write a book supporting the Palestinian cause, her exhaustive research caused her to turn 180 degrees. What Peters uncovered was that the Palestinian problem, blamed by so many on Israel, turned out to have resulted from a monstrous historical hoax. Piecing together documents tucked away in old Ottoman and British records, dating from the beginning of the Israelis return to their homeland, like an expert detective, Peters uncovered the crime against the Jews.

The real history of this middle east conflict goes like this.

Friday, March 27, 2015

Who are the Good Guys, the Left or the Right?

There are commenters on this blog who feel free to tell us what they think of us Conservatives, and it’s never nice. Well, some of us don’t think you are so hot. First of all, take your new name you are so proud of, i.e., Progressive. How arrogant is that? Believe me, not every new idea that you are so enamored with is Progressing us.

At the same time, you denigrate the word Conservative, as if the ideas we want to conserve are regressive. There is nothing regressive about our inspired Constitution, nor is the inspired Bible.

There are time-tested ideas worth conserving. (And by the way, you are not smarter or more inspired than those who went before you. Even if you think you are.)

Second of all, you constantly remind us on the blog of what good people you are and that you think we are bad. You care for people and we don’t. Yet we point out again and again that your programs, by exploiting people’s weaknesses are morally corrupting. Because you never respond to that criticism, I can’t tell whether you don’t see the points we make, or you don’t want to see them, or you are too stupid to see them. (Most recent example of not getting a point, I wrote an article the other day that charged that those who created all the Left’s entitlement programs were not farseeing and thus poorly conceived the systems for our present situation, endangering our future. None of you on the Left bothered to even give a thoughtful response to the charges.)

You on the Left don’t think we are nice people, well some of us on the Right think you are the ones who aren’t nice people.

Monday, March 23, 2015

Response to This Blog Commentators on Entitlements

   A few weeks ago, a debate was going on our blog about large socialist-like government programs. Those on the Left brought up the entitlement programs and challenged us as to which we would get rid of. For a moment I was stumped. Then it hit me. The question is no longer which one we do away with, but for the first time, the real question is: "Which one can we even keep!"

Look at the facts:

In its "A SUMMARY OF THE 2014 ANNUAL REPORTS" the Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees concluded that: "Neither Medicare nor Social Security can sustain projected long-run program costs in full under currently scheduled financing."

1. Social Security’s Disability Insurance--the Trustees project this trust fund depleted late next year.

2. Social Security’s trust fund income is already below 100 percent and is expected to decline continuously until reserve depletion in 2030. (15 years from now)

3. Medicare, with Obamacare loaded on top of it will be going under by next year with projected Trust Fund asset reserves becoming fully depleted by 2030.

4. The Trustees project that this annual cash-flow deficit will average about $77 billion between 2014 and 2018 before rising steeply as income growth slows. . . .while the number of beneficiaries continues to grow at a substantially faster rate than the number of covered workers.

Where will the fix come from?
In 2013 Social Security and Medicare together accounted for 41 percent of Federal expenditures. That leaves the rest for Defense and Discretionary Spending.

Long-term unfunded obligations in Medicare and Social Security alone reach nearly $49 trillion. That’s nearly three times the size of the total national debt of $17.6 trillion.

When these programs were conceived, I am sure there were conservative thinkers who challenged whether a large bureaucratic system could manage such programs without free market principles. In the programs there would be no incentives for cost containment–no incentives for the workers in the system to be productive--and, no incentives for controlling waste and fraud. (On the rolls were 6.5 million people in the U.S. who have reached the ripe old age of 112.)

Also, who could have imagined a day when people would be living much longer–when a tsunami of baby boomers would hit the system–when hoards of illegal aliens from all over the world would be coming here to get on the gravy train–and nearly half the population would not even be paying into it?

Watching the system implode, those early conservatives can now say "We told you so." However, they would not be allowed to save it. They would be told "You want to throw granny off the cliff." Well no. But right now it looks like those on the Left can only suggest that we all hold hands, sing kumbaya, and dive off the cliff together with granny.

12 Reasons Ted Cruz Is a Strong GOP 2016 Candidate

12 Reasons Ted Cruz is a Strong GOP 2016 Candidate

Sunday, March 22, 2015

Thursday, March 12, 2015

Drawing the Wrong Lessons From Selma

Drawing the Wrong Lessons From Selma
At the commemoration in Selma, National Public Radio asked Selma’s Black mayor how "what happened in Selma 50 years ago fits into the current conversation about race relations in this country."

"I’m not so sure how it fits," replied Mayor George Evans. He then

Wednesday, March 11, 2015

Will Hillary Also Defy the Constitution?

Responding to the  letter to the Ayatollahs, 47 Senators send letter, Hillary sarcastically said "to reporters at the United Nations on Tuesday that "one has to ask, what was the purpose of this letter?" "There appear to be two logical answers," Clinton said. "Either these senators were trying to