Protests or anarchy?

Interesting, isn't it, that published pictures from the recent clash during a pro-president demonstration at Berkeley show the anti-Trump instigators of violence are wearing masks, while those supporting the president are not.

It is also interesting that published reports indicated the anti-Trump protestors came with bats and other implements to use as weapons.

Interesting as well are other anti-government, anti-conservative, and anti-Trump so called protests are characterized by violence in published reports.

From this perspective, a trend is developing.  A scary, negative trend.

These so called protests are no where similar to the civil rights protests of the 60s.  They are more like the violence associated with the Democratic national convention in the 60s.  These so called protests are the sources of property damage, physical assaults, and lawlessness.

Moreover, the recent report that Berkeley has cancelled a speech by conservative commentator Ann Coulter highlights the deeply disturbing practice by universities and colleges of denying free speech.  This practice is particularly onerous when it occurs on taxpayer funded campuses.

The combination of the trend of violence perpetrated by those against conservative views and denying free speech by universities and campuses refutes all that for which the civil rights movement stood.  The combination sounds more like something that would happen in a despotic country than in America.

Peaceful protests - yes.

Anarchy - no.     

Let loose the dogs of therapy

Let loose the dogs of therapy

Reading and listening to the reactions across the country since the election is, if nothing else, an interesting and somewhat entertaining exercise. There is certainly rich fodder for articles and posts in the overreactions in some quarters, most notably the left. Strident calls for this and that permeate the reactions, like demands for electors to change their votes to Clinton. Perhaps nowhere else is reaction more absurd and downright silly than on college and university campuses. Let loose the dogs of therapy I say. Fill the crying rooms to the maximum. Provide huggers at every building entrance and exit. Open the gates for protests. Cancel classes and exams. Build entire safe space buildings instead of football stadiums.  

For the most part, conservatives tolerantly stand aside and watch, stifling the urge to rant and rail at the ridiculous. Why? Because conservatives are, by nature, tolerant.

Central to the conservative approach to life is tolerance. As long as others obey the laws, all laws, and respect others, conservatives are tolerant of their personal decisions, actions, and views. Conservatives may not agree with those decisions, actions, and views, but normally remain tolerant of them. It is when others demand conservatives accept, agree with, and even actively support decisions, actions, and views with which they disagree that the fat is in the fire, as the saying goes.

Ironically, in the aftermath of the election liberals and progressives continue demonstrating their lack of tolerance, a hallmark to their approach to life.  Dogmatic statements abound, underscoring the liberal/progressive stance. Intolerance abounds, as they make claim after claim, demand change after change, and attempt to repudiate the election results. So be it. 

But there are times when conservatives must react as liberals cross a bright and shining line.  One such crossing occurred at Amherst College when first the American flag was lowered inappropriately by the campus administration to half-staff after the election.  Then a student took down the flag and burned it.  Then the administration put a flag up, again at half-staff.  Then, in a final insult, decided not to fly the American flag at all.  Such action requires a reaction.

The reaction occurred over the weekend when hundreds of veterans and others protested at the college by bringing and waving hundreds of American flags.

Amherst College President Lash should be ashamed of the message he sends.  He should be fired for insinuating all forms of hate to the American flag, under which millions of men and women have served.  The federal government should immediately place a hold on all federal funding awarded the school (except individual student federal financial aid) until the flag is once again flown at full staff.

If he wants to provide therapy dogs, hugs, crying rooms, safe spaces, and the like, so be it.  I disagree, but will tolerate his actions.

But do not expect me to tolerate the disrespect he shows our American flag.

At onetime I thought disagreeing with things was natural as one ages.

At onetime I thought disagreeing with things was natural as one ages.  For example, my parents weren't too crazy about the music, style of clothes, and other manifestations of our generation.  As I am confident their parents weren't thrilled about similar things in their youth.  So differences between generations seem normal.

Be as that may be, however, it is clear the issues we now face are far more than generational.  Our entire belief system is being attacked on multiple fronts by multiple means.  This cultural war is being waged by politicians and activists seemingly bent upon taking down the country.  Belatedly in my view, the heartland is rising up in anger against demands falsely labeled as tolerance for difference.  

It is not enough for some to plead for tolerance for the secular lifestyle, they demand that all must accept and support it.  It is not enough to ask for acceptance of Muslims, they demand that we yield to their views and cast out our Christian beliefs.  It is not enough to seek workplace equality for females, they demand preference and lowered standards, while demanding we demean masculinity.  It is not enough to seek an end to racial bias, they now demand racial preferences, racially segregated housing on college campuses, and even reparations.  It is not enough to seek solutions to the immigration problems, they demand rights reserved for citizens be accorded illegal immigrants. 

Flying under this false flag of tolerance, they are actively demanding social and cultural changes.  And since they can't make wholesale changes for the entire country, they have found one element within our nation in which they can make these social and cultural changes at will, a stroke of the pen.  Executive fiat without care or consideration of the impact.  

Most disturbing to me and fellow veterans is a particularly dangerous manifestation of these demands for social and cultural changes.  The current administration, like Bill Clinton's, uses the military as their own social science laboratory.  Hating the integrity, sacrifice, honesty, honor, courage, and commitment of the men and women in uniform, Obama and Clinton have forced changes by edict upon the military, changes that have nothing to do with combat preparedness or readiness.  They are intent upon social and cultural policies that do away with what is needed to succeed in combat.  

Concurrently they reduced budgets, selected for senior flag officers many sycophants who join in degrading  the military, failed to gain Congressional approval for war, enacted failed national security policies, appeased our adversaries, squandered crucial resources, and used men and women in uniform as potted plants for photo ops.  Flying under the false flag of tolerance, they brought in others of their ilk to shove this crap down the throats of the uniformed forces.

And because the progressives have not been able to squelch the rising voices from the conservative heartland, they continue to force the military to yield to their increasing demands, breaking faith with those who serve.  Sadly, tragically it is not too surprising, since less than one half of one percent of the nation serves in uniform and the progressives are not in this group of patriots.  

The disdain in which Obama and Clinton hold the military is well known and unquestioned.  They and their fellow  progressives, liberals, left, Democrats, media, or whatever label best fits are actually the most intolerant group in our country.  Hence the vitriol surrounding the election, as the starkly different choices are magnified in the heartland of America.      
 

We must depart the path set upon by Obama in particular.  We must turn back by repeal, cancellation, legislation, repudiation, and other action the injurious policies and actions of the past seven plus years.  I truly believe the majority of Americans understand this.  The big question is whether they will turn out in significant numbers to vote.  Sadly, Trump's words and actions work against getting the high conservative voter turnout necessary to deny Clinton the presidency.

Profoundly telling, in conversations with fellow retired senior leaders, to a man they have expressed that we could not serve in today's military.  We'd either be jailed for speaking our minds or simply depart rather than force upon the youth of our nation the perverted social and cultural policies demanded by POTUS and his cronies, who are simultaneously weakening our military to dangerously low levels.

Disagreeing with the actions of the current administration is not based upon generational differences.  It is based upon injurious actions being forced upon the military under the false rubric of pursuing tolerance.  

Only a high voter turnout can turn the tide.  

If utterly confused, you are not alone.

If utterly confused, you are not alone.

As what passes for the media, both left leaning and right leaning, pumps out opinions and purposefully slanted stories thinly disguised as "news" to suit their personal objectives, what are citizens to think?

Story after story and article after article seem more designed to inflame that to inform.  In pursuit of the aforementioned personal objectives, common decency has been shed in favor of sensationalism by unfounded accusation.  Honesty in reporting gone by the wayside, joining judgment, ethics, and integrity as traits no longer attributable to the press.

In our nation where the press once served an invaluable and honorable role, we citizens are now subjected to pummeling by social media driven drivel.  What once would have never risen to the level of publication now is given false credence by an over anxious group of individuals more intent on self promotion than truth, justice, and the American way.

Reiterating an earlier point, this sad state exists in both left leaning and right leaning media.

Where no offense exists, they seek to create it.  Where no law has been broken, they define actions as criminal.  Instead of reporting facts so the populace can exercise its considerable judgment, they spoon feed carefully and deliberately edited story lines.  Utterly disgusting.

Beyond the disgust, however, is the disservice done to the nation.  The battling personalities create and sew confusion and discontent, normally with an indignant sense of superiority.

Capitalizing upon this abhorrent phenomena, political entities of all types cite the tons of drivel as facts in their pursuit of power.

Some use the power of the media's considerable megaphone to declare objectivity is no longer required.  Others use the power to deliberately inflame and incite.  And some others are clearly crude, base, uncouth, shameless, vile, and despicable.

No wonder citizens are confused regarding what the media portrays as newsworthy.