Not Cuban enough, Not Black Enough, Not Italian Enough....
Fromthe Mercury New, comes an article describing an interview between Ted Cruz (2016 GOP Candidate) and Mark Halperin’s (Bloomberg News), in which, Halperin tested Cruz’s authenticity as a Cuban The author, Ruben Navarrette, took offence, as he knows Cruz, as well as other prominent Hispanic’s. Apparently, if one of a Republican, then one might not be Hispanic enough, Black enough, Female Enough, and so on.
I took umbrage at this particular article as having once been in a position as a child, having a parent who as not quite “white” enough – being Spanish – Moorish Spanish, and having epitaphs yelled as my father held me – “what is that Brown man doing holding a white baby”, it occurred to me that having thought all of this behind us, that it was truly not the individuals flaming the fires of racial, ethnic hate, it was those who have a political agenda, from the left, of continuing the nonsensical dogma that if one if black they belong to the Democrats, if one is Hispanic, they belong to the Democrats.
If someone is a decent public service, or trying to become one, then it is not the color of one’s skin, or the authenticity that should be established but the character of the individual, nothing more, nothing less.
Shame on this nation for allowing the political bickering on the left determining who not enough of any one flavor is.
There are Democrats of all stripes who are perfectly worthy public servants, and there are the same people on the Republican side, or the Libertarian side, or the Green Party side. Shut up already.
Monday, May 11, 2015
Monday, May 04, 2015
What amounted to a small gathering of those who, in the name of free speech (and shock most likely given the recent disaster in Paris), has made headlines (in certain respects), as two Isis morons decided to blow up the event. They managed to wound a security guard before being killed by overwhelming force. Isis took credit in some social media posts, and of course, there were plenty in the US who were opposed to the event to begin with. (Daily Mail UK). It goes without saying that religions in general are a target in the US based precisely on our right of free speech to express ourselves (with limitations – i.e. fire in a crowded even where no fire exists). Given the lampoons and downright disgusting portrayals of Christian, Jewish, and other religions, all without one smattering of violence or extreme protests, it would be assumed that regardless of what the religion decrees, (Islam), there is no room for reprisals on American soil, given our laws.
If one cannot recall any instances where events unfolded that many may have found “jihad” worthy, there was the Feces covered Madona as an art exhibit(Mt. Holyoke College) – No one blow up. There were the cartoons, not all complementary of the Pope (Jason Bach Cartoons) No one blown up.
The things we find offensive are just that, but not cause of murder, unless of course, that is the tenant of a religion based on an aggressive world domination basis. History in seconds. Mohammed, prophet or not, was a general who, being somewhat of a visionary, decided the only way to build up the ranks to do battle and unit all those myriad fighting tribes, he would form a religions. He borrowed heavily from the Jewish texts, and before one knew it, he had conquered Jerusalem, marched his armies across Africa, and made it all the way to Spain (Of course, deceased and legened by that point). What is missing from today’s history, if it is taught at all, is the reality of a religion based on a general understanding that the masses will follow eh name of Jihad and the Ruling class will amass a fortune, while controlling the world – just isn’t’ – a religion of peace. It may have evolved, somewhat in the past 5 centuries, but the vestiges of medieval thought still cling to many who simply do not wish to jump forward and join the rest of the world – in peace, and in prosperity.
Therefore, although much can be said of scam religions (and there is much that has, from Catholicism, to Judaism, to Buddhism to Mormonism) and although there has been violence in the name of religion (most notably and most recently the Irish Catholic – British Protestant debacle in the UK) one might note it is based most entirely on political loss or political gain, having nothing whatsoever to do with actual – religion.
None-the-less, there is no place in the US for this type of BS where a cartoon cannot be drawn without death threats, or worse, events cannot be held without pounds of security in the event one might be offended and decide to blow up, behead, or otherwise practice a religion which should have died out in the 1400’s (instead of actively pursuing the slave trade in African, in league with the Dutch, and later causing a much ballyhooed civil war in this nation. (This blogger suggest taking advanced history course, if one is any longer available).
So much for reality – and plenty of backslapping for blowing up two would be ISIS terrorist in a suburb of Dallas.
The solution is simple, lock down the borders, close all of their social media accounts and start teaching the world, exactly what this religion consists of – in fact, not just this religion all religions – as part and parcel of history, for good or for ill, they should all be taught in schools. The reality of the said religion and not the practice of said religion.
Might go a long way to opening the eyes and ears of a nation clearly undereducated and swayed more by political correctness than reality.
Monday, April 13, 2015
Hillary Clinton announced her candidacy via social media this weekend in what the Washington Post dubbed: “A long awaited announcement”. Apparently, Clinton is going to strike a populist tone.
If there was a do-over and 2008 was the year, that would have been the time to forward Clinton as the candidate of choice (she was the popular candidate of choice, she was not the candidate of choice for the Super Delegates), unfortunately that did not happen. At that time, there was as choice between Clinton, McCain and Obama, it was a no-brainer for the women of America, both Independents, Democrats and yes, some Republicans’. Unfortunately that was not to be, we can’t turn back the clock, and despite best and worst intentions of the media – it may not be the best time for Clinton in 2016. Martin O’Malley is running as well, and he strikes a younger more attractive tone vis a vis the aura of Dynasty that hangs about Clintons Neck.
On the GOP side, polling suggests according to Bloomberg, that Rand Paul and Jeb Bush may have problems in the primary, although, Bush more than Paul, while other conservatives such as Ted Cruz will fare better. (Bloomberg). One might suggest that a robust primary, sans the attack ads at Paul (first) and second whoever does not fit the Beltway image of what is right for the nation, is what does the primary a disservice. Let the duke it out in the debates and the same should hold for the Democrats. Several news sources site that Rubio will announce this week – adding to a decidedly “youthful” cadre of candidates.
A note on those dark and menacing political ads – those should be pulled – one by Ron Paul, a candidate which this blogger finds more than worthy of support, is exactly the type of negative ad, dark, foreboding, that turns back on the candidate. Having watched so many good politicians go down in flames due to bad ads, the anti-Hillary ad is just that. Highlighting differences is fine in this opinion, helping the competition is not. Humble opinion notwithstanding, this general election primary is shaping up to be one of the most interesting - a lot of smart people are running, and there is nothing that the country needs more than a fresh face with a brain.