Tuesday's view

This article about details concerning the multiple count indictment against Congressman Duncan Hunter and his wife is the source of considerable anger.

If he is found guilty of the charges, mad as hell won't even cover it.

The source of the is not just that a member of Congress is alleged to have expended campaign funds for personal use.  Hell, it's likely lots if not all of them have.

What angers me most is that a fellow Marine Corps officer is accused of these crimes.  It is insulting and embarrassing!

Officers of Marines are held to higher standards of integrity, ethics, accountability, and responsibility.  It is simply a basic job requirement.

Once a Marine, always a Marine.

The brotherhood of officers of Marines should be sore, angry, pissed off, and just plain mad.

If Hunter and his wife are convicted, they must go to jail.

Update:  Now Hunter blames it all on his wife.  What kind of a poor excuse for a man throws his bride under the bus?

One picture

This one picture speaks to the bond of Marine Corps camaraderie.

Semper Fidelis

Military tradition

 
Around this time of year, several military related events (US Navy birthday, US Marine Corps birthday, Veterans Day) evoke traditional actions and ceremonies.

Tradition is something civilians, in general, do not understand.  And the current group of progressives, in particular, can not comprehend the importance of tradition.  

For members of the military and veterans, our institutional beliefs make us great, as they set the tone for all who serve.  We were trained in the histories and traditions of our services, not to indoctrinate, but to ensure we understood the responsibility we undertook to safeguard the valor, memories, victories, and sacrifices of those who went before us.

Our traditions help reinforce the belief and imperative of sacrifice, of putting the welfare of our nation, service, unit, mission, and comrades above self.  Never let a fellow Marine down!

The current crop of progressives routinely attack the military and its traditions; like the absolute importance of the American Flag.  Where they can, they seek to force change in our traditions.  For example, doing away with Navy enlisted ratings. 

It is another all too sad reminder of Obama's, Clinton's, and their crowd's disdain for our military .  Tragically, it also provides insight into the world that would follow a Clinton election.  Infamous for her demands that military uniforms be kept out of sight when she was FLOTUS, one can only speculate what steps she might undertake as POTUS. 

Fortunately, we stand above HRC and her kind.  They can not appreciate that which they don't understand, as the reasons for their lack of understanding are simple.  They put self above all else.  They seek personal power, influence, and financial wealth.  They seek to destroy those institutions built upon long histories of tradition, sacrifice, and service to the nation, because these long serving institutions threaten their self-serving objectives.  They disparage those among us who willingly join to serve the nation, to embrace the traditions we learn, while understanding to do so may lead to the ultimate sacrifice.

As we celebrate, remember, and mourn, our traditions stand strong.  No politician without military experience will ever be able to understand this.   

Judge them by the same standards

As news cycles ebb and flow, pieces judging candidates seem to dominate.  Apart from deliberately stilted coverage, this is the way it should be.  Though the fine art of principled journalism has yielded to expressing individual views disguised as "news," the valued role of the media is to inform.  Just the facts, nothing but the facts.

Perhaps no where is this more important than when judging elected officials and those seeking elected office.  All that can be asked is that elected officials and those seeking elected office be judged by the same standards.    

Determining the standards by which they are judged is fairly easy.  For example, truthfulness, honesty, obeying the law, integrity, performance, ethics, consistency, knowledge, fidelity, accomplishment, respect, veracity, humility, decency, patriotism, honor, judgment, principle, and embodying American values.

Applying the standards is also fairly easy.  Review the records of accomplishment or lack thereof.  Review what has been said, publicly and privately.  Look at the family life.  Compare and contrast stated objectives with accomplishments.  Evaluate friendships and associations (birds of a feather flock together).  Critically review political speeches for the truth.  And many more.

And judge each by these same standards.  Do not hold one candidate or elected official to one set of standards and the opponents to another.        

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.  

Clinton Insults Voters

 

A candidate for president has insulted voters.  Here is how one news outlet reported it.

Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee, told the fundraiser audience that half of the supporters for Trump, the Republican nominee, could be put into a "basket of deplorables."

“Racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it,” Clinton said. “There are people like that and he has lifted them up.”

Though she attempted to soften the remarks, her comments displayed unmitigated gall and expansive narcissism.  Perhaps a bit of desperation in view of recent polling.

She can not bring herself to accept that voters just do not find her qualified to serve as president.  Poll after poll clearly show the overwhelming number of Americans find her to be untrustworthy and dishonest.

So, in typical Clintonian style, she attacks them.  Attacks voters through the use of vile and inflammatory language.  Attacks voters in a manner intent on fomenting racial, ethic, and social discord.

Ms. Clinton, a newsflash.  Opposing your candidacy does not make one deplorable, racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, or Islamophobic.  Opposing your candidacy is because of your corruption, perpetual lying, lack of integrity, "exceptionally careless" mishandling of classified information, greed, malfeasance in office, flip flopping on TPP, abysmal judgment, attacking women accusing your husband of sexual assault and harassment, and all sorts of other disqualifying actions over the years.  Such as thoroughly debunked claim that you landed in Bosnia under sniper fire.

People just do not want you to be president.  They are not deplorable.  They are exercising their right to choose for whom to vote.   

    

 

Opinions and debates

In the seemingly perpetual campaigning across the country, serious damage is being done to essential aspects of our uniquely American freedoms.  Political campaigns, aided and abetted by the media, are leading the way in causing the damage.  Damage that is magnified by the quasi-to-actual anonymity of social media.

Freedom of expression is a pillar of freedom upon which our nation stands.  This freedom extends to the ability to express opinion and then debate the merits of said views.  In establishing this freedom, wisely neither the Constitution nor the Amendments require that the opinions be based on fact or even logical conclusion.  It is debate about the opinion that will or will not convince others of its merit.  Those opinions with value will earn support and those without will be disregarded.

Or at least that is the way things should work.  But it is certainly not the way it happens today.

Starting at the very top, pursuing votes as a candidate for president has devolved into anything but informed opinions being debated, so that the electorate may determine which have merit.  Rather than mature iterations of opinion and debate, candidates sling about outlandish insults at one another.  Hyperbole replaces reason.  All sorts of intent and behaviors are ascribed to opponents.  And this goes on unchecked.

The behavior is left unchecked by the media, who actually serve to inflame the situation.  Talking heads no longer merely report, they filter, edit, and opine to meet their personal objectives.  The damaging behavior, left unchecked, aided and abetted by the media, is subsequently proliferated by rampant social media.  And social media is notoriously unreliable, but certainly full of scathing, often anonymous screed.  But hey, if a candidate for the presidency and the media can behave in such a repugnant manner, should not voters able to follow suit.

Imagine primary and general campaigns in which the candidates refrained from the hyper-toxic accusations and personal attacks.  What if the campaigns strictly put forth their opinions on important matters, then debated their opponents on the merits pro and con?  What if the media simply reported the stated opinions and accurately reported the ensuing debates, without attempting to tilt the information one direction or another?

Yes, under our system of free speech an individual can utter falsehoods with legal immunity.  Individuals can take to social media and communicate inflammatory and wholly false rhetoric with legal immunity.  And individuals on social media can transmit all sorts of vile, reprehensible, and troubling comments without being held legally responsible.

Imagine candidates not declaring as fact matters that are subsequently proven to be false.  Imagine candidates not employing social media to communicate inflammatory comments.  Imagine candidates communicating civilly.  Imagine candidates presenting opinions and seriously debating their merits. 

That would exhibit the manner in which our freedom of expression of opinions and debates is meant to be. 

If candidates, starting with those seeking the presidency, set the tone and example by taking this approach, the damage would be slowed.  If followed by the media seriously and judiciously reporting the opinions and debates, without leaning one way or the other, the damage would be further slowed.  And maybe, just maybe, such examples set by candidates and the media would bleed over into the realm of social media.          

 

  

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.             

Trump insults our nation

Egad!  

Trump insults our nation.  Almost every time he tweets or opens his mouth.

A list of the insults, aimed at individuals and groups, would be far to long to repeat here.  But the accumulated impact is a massive insult to the nation.

One seeking the presidency of the United States should, above all else, be serious.  By words and actions, the candidate must demonstrate he/she understands the enormity of the position they seek.

Clearly, Trump does not.

With the verbal eloquence of a recalcitrant child, demeanor of either a bully or horrible Las Vegas lounge comic, and social media persona of an immature teenager, he has most assuredly made a mockery of the office.

Histrionic to the extreme, his utterances, tweets, and boasts demonstrate absolute unsuitability for the presidency.  One example makes the point.

Stipulating that the DNC unquestionably chose to have Mr. Khan speak as a provocateur, Trump's scurrilous response was unacceptable.

A response was not in fact required.  

If compelled to respond, Trump could have simply said, "Like all Americans, I honor all Gold Star families."   But he did not.  He chose to insult the Khans multiple times.

Again, a extremely long list of other examples could fill volumes.

Bottom line: Mr. Trump insults the nation and its people and is unworthy of their votes.

Footnote:  To be completely clear on the matter, Ms. Clinton is equally unworthy of our votes.    
 

Clinton can't have it both ways

Of recent, Ms. Clinton attempts to deflect justifiable criticism and concern of her by blaming subordinates, including her members of her innermost circle.  

As one working to persuade the American electorate that she is the leader for the future, she can not have it both ways.

Basic, elementary leadership means willingly accepting responsibility for everything your organization does or fails to do.  Good leaders know and practice this.  For example, in the military it is not uncommon for the commanding officer to held absolutely responsible for the actions of his/her subordinates.  This includes being relieved for cause, as the military saying goes.  Such as the commanding officer of a navy ship being relieved after it runs aground, even if he/she were asleep in his/her stateroom at the time of the grounding.

But Clinton, who demands that her adversaries be held to this very high standard of responsibility for the actions and words of their subordinates, wants to be a leader in name only.  

She seeks all the authority, without any of the responsibility.

In a recent situation, her advocates seek to deflect criticism of possible pay-to-play actions in the state department during her tenure, arising from emails revealing direct contact between her aides and those of former President Clinton, by saying she did not personally communicate with the external parties by email.  

Sure, two of her most trusted and closest aides did so, but according to her and others, she is not to be held responsible.

Simple answer...wrong!

The real leader creates a climate in which his/her subordinates, including the inner, personal staff, operate and for which he/she is responsible.  This climate sets the tone for the organization.  And it establishes that responsibility goes right to the top.  Responsibility for anything that is done or failed to be done. 

A leader can delegate authority to act in their name, but not the responsibility for the outcome of those actions.

The leader holds subordinates accountable for their actions in pursuit of the objectives the leader sets, and taken within the climate he/she establishes.  It is inconceivable that Clinton's closest and most trusted innermost staff would act on such high matters (described in one revealed email as on behalf of a "very imortant" person) without either her explicit approval (which did not need to be recorded in an email) or within their understanding of the objectives and climate she expressly set.  

Since no one was fired, the public can rightfully conclude the actions of Mills and Abedin (and others) have been and continue to be exactly what Clinton directs and desires.

Thus, in this latest of many, many questionable (if not criminal at worst or unethical at best) actions, Clinton can not have it both ways.  She can not stand for the most important leadership position within the country, seeking all the authority that comes with the office, and simultaneously seek to avoid the basic tenet of leadership: responsibility.         

Common politeness and decency

A favorite neighbor and I were chatting this morning, as friends and neighbors do.  He and his wife embody America, as they and one of their sons work at a company founded by her grandfather.  Hardworking, family oriented, lovers of our great nation.

After talking baseball (we'd been to a game together on Sunday, in which our local team lost) and the inevitable politics, our discussion switched to events in our neighborhood, small town, and nation.  Specifically, people seeming to "go off" on one another for even the slightest of reasons.  

Why, we wondered aloud, is this happening more and more?

Recently another neighbor yelled and created a scene about something that could have been dealt with quietly and politely.  Sure, the underlying matter was an aggravation, as workmen were spewing concrete dust into the air, rather than using the right systems and procedures to control the contaminants.  Instead of calmly informing the workers, our neighbor just "went off," as the saying goes.

We then recounted other similar examples, including some that have made headlines.  People condemning and demanding of others, for a full spectrum of perceived slights.  Politeness and decency are becoming lost in this age of social media insults hurled without thought.  No longer are reason and courtesy the best approaches.

The ability of people to either grin and bear it or politely state their positions appear absent in our current divisive, hyper-charged environment fueled by inflammatory rhetoric from political candidates, activists, university professors, talk show hosts, and other cretins who are provided the proverbial electronic microphone by a compliant and biased media.

We are inundated by hate filled messaging.  And if hate isn't present, there are those intent on fomenting it.  Of course, the media is right there to fan the flames in order to sell more and get better ratings.  So it is no surprise, really, when example after example of folks losing it come to the surface.

From the road rage incident in which a woman runs over and kills a motorcyclist, to an argument at a ballgame that leads to a fight leaving a man permanently disabled, to the school child who attacks the teacher, our nation seems to be woefully off track.

Common politeness and decency are now the exceptions, rather than the (expected) norms.  Can it be traced to the proliferation of near perpetual election campaigning based upon the division born of identity politics?  Can it be traced to talk shows, radio, television, and social media stirring up problems in the name of pseudo-journalism?

I don't have any answers, but these two questions may point in the right direction.      

Predictably

At a recent gathering, the older veterans' comments were predictably negative about the state of affairs in our country.  Equally predictable were words -- harsh, angry, condemning, frustrated, emotional -- about the choices in this presidential election.  "What fools!" from a retired Navy Captain captured it best.

It was a decidedly an anti-Clinton group, to no one's surprise I am sure.  As a retired Marine Colonel observed, when she falsely claimed to have landed under sniper fire in Bosnia, she insulted all those who have and do wear the uniforms of our nation's military.  This alone, in his mind, disqualifies her.

But make no mistake, Trump faired no better.  His scurrilous and despicable comments to and about a Gold Star Family enraged these veterans.  They were livid!  

The outrage across the nation at Trump was most eloquently captured in an op-ed written by the retired soldier who was Captain Khan's commanding officer at the time of his death.  As only a commanding officer can do, he put the entire matter in proper perspective.

But whether it is Clinton's hubris or Trump's maniacal attacks, their comments expose their unfitness for the office they seek. 

Predictably, it will likely occur that these episodes will be just others in the litany of episodes to come this election season.  One candidate continues to lie, obfuscate, and misrepresent, displaying a total absence of character.  The other candidate continues to insult, belittle, and attack just about every element of our great nation, displaying a total absence of judgment.

Predictably, however, one of these two fools, borrowing the retired Navy Captain's apt description, will be elected.

Predictably, the nation will bemoan that day.

Make military service a mandatory requirement for eligibility

We need a change to the eligibility requirements for high level elected federal offices, such as President, Vice-President, members of the Senate, and members of the House of Representatives.  Due to the extraordinary impact these individuals have on all facets of national security, to be eligible for these crucial offices, the laws should be changed to require satisfactorily and honorably completing at least three years of active duty in the nation's military.

According to a Fox News Report, "The 2012 election marked the first time in 80 years that neither major party presidential nominee had served in the military.  Two years later, the 114th Congress was sworn in with the smallest proportion of veterans on record. According to an October 2015 Congressional Research Service report, the high point was reached in the 92nd Congress (1971-72) when 73 percent of Congress had served in the military.  Today, veterans make up 20 percent of the Senate and just 18 percent of the House of Representatives."  And, "On Capitol Hill, veterans are even underrepresented among congressional staffs. Justin Brown, the founder of HillVets, told FoxNews.com vets account for approximately 3 percent of congressional staff members, a figure that reflects the high barrier they face."

These numbers reveal the exceptional disconnect between the nation and its military. With less than one-half of one percent of the nation's citizens currently serving in the military, the lack of understanding of the military is astounding, even dangerous.  Moreover, the disconnection makes it all too easy for our elected leaders to send our men and women into harm's way.  For example, the recent POTUS announcement that 250 more members of our military are being sent to Syria. (Can anyone remember the mission creep in Vietnam?)

With presidents allowed to send our military into combat without a declaration of war, under the pretense of spurious and inexact Congressionally approved Authorizations to Use Military Force (AUMF), the seriousness of such action is not debated by those who have actually served our nation in uniform.

Stop this practice and immediately enact laws mandating satisfactorily and honorably completing at least three years of active duty in the nation's military to be eligible for election or appointment to our highest elected federal offices: President, Vice-President, members of the Senate, and members of the House of Representatives.

  

Why should she be believed?

Why should Ms. Clinton's claims about the emails processed through the now infamous insecure personal server be believed?  She has said the following.

Regarding providing emails to the Department of State, she said, "I responded right away and provided all my emails that could possibly be work-related."  However, it was years after leaving office and happened only after the personal email server became public knowledge.

Regarding her supposed and self-defined personal emails, she said, "I chose not to keep my private personal emails."  A strange statement, since they were retained for years after leaving the Department of State and were supposedly deleted only after the whole email issue came to the surface.

Regarding categorizing the emails as work related or personal, she said, "For any government employee, it is that government employee's responsibility to determine what's personal and what's work-related. I am very confident of the process that we conducted and the e-mails that were produced."  Why should the people accept her assurances, after it took years for any emails to be provided?  

Regarding the security of the personal server, she said, "And there were no security breaches."  This seems questionable at best, as she also claimed the sever was physically protected by the Secret Service, which is accepted as fact.  However, physical contact is not required to "hack" a server.  The claim is further called into question by the recent revelation that an international hacker was extradited to the U.S. by the FBI team investigating this matter. 

And, finally, regarding the processing of classified information on the personal server, she said, "I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.  So I'm certainly well-aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material."  This has been proven to be absolutely false, with two dozen of the more than 2,000 deemed to contain classified information are so highly classified that they could not be released in any form.

After the above, there is a major matter not receiving the public attention it warrants.  The contents of the so-called personal emails.  Granting that some of the more than 30,000 emails were likely mundane and truly personal does not mean that all were.  Follow the logic: if the emails were so carefully scrutinized, as Clinton has asserted, prior to release to the Department of State (and then only after the issue became public and only in printed hard copy form), how did more than 2,000 containing classified information get released?  Why would Clinton knowingly release emails containing classified information?

Is her claim that she is "well-aware of the classification requirements" to be believed?  With all the thus far released emails containing massive amounts of classified information, the answer must be NO.  Based on this glaring inaccuracy, if not outright falsehood, can the American people and the courts believe her statement that, "I responded right away and provided all my emails that could possibly be work-related?"  No.

The matter not receiving adequate attention centers around the contents of the so-called personal emails.  If the review of work related email did not eliminate thousands of classified emails, we can not expect the review of personal emails was any more thorough or accurate.  Thus we can not believe that the deleted "personal" emails contained solely personal matters.  In party, because we can not believe how Clinton or her people would define personal.  For example, would communications on Clinton Foundation matters with business and government leaders in countries with whom the United States government was negotiating be defined as personal?

It is simple, we can not believe Ms. Clinton.

Let us hope the FBI is able to recover and review the so-called personal emails.  It is highly likely some of them contain potentially explosive insights into Clinton's behavior, judgment, and decisions while secretary of state.  

Elsewhere, the liberals

It is mightily concerning to look at our country and see the wide disparities between real America and that which the power elite, main stream media, politicians, and other liberals embrace.

Real Americans turned out in the hundreds to honor fallen Marine Staff Sergeant Louis Cardin.  Elsewhere, many liberals fawn over serial liar and likely felon Hillary Clinton, eagerly seeking to elect her to the highest office in the land. 

Real Americans wake up each day, thanking God for their health, family, and well being.  Elsewhere, liberal judges, educators, unionists, and activists wake up each day seeking to silent Christians and punish the free exercise of their religious beliefs, while simultaneously demanding we accept the views of others.

Real Americans rise, take their morning meal, and then head off to their jobs, doing their best to support themselves and their families.  Elsewhere, liberals seek to take more and more from these working real Americans and simply give it away to those considering it a right to take from those who do and give to those who don't, a situation created by the liberals.

Real American warriors wearing the cloth of our country's military go in harm's way, standing ready to defend all the people of this nation.  Elsewhere, liberals seek to make the military institution a social science laboratory, determined to force their views on others, while simultaneously reducing our military readiness.

Real Americans tolerate opposing views of others, disagreeing while acting in tolerance.  Elsewhere, dogmatic liberals demand that views different from their own be silenced and even punished, while simultaneously demanding that all acquiesce to and accept their views.

Real Americans recognize and honor that the nuclear family (a marriage of one man and one woman, plus their children) is the foundation upon which our country's success is built.  Elsewhere, liberals embrace and celebrate same sex marriage, unwed motherhood (sometimes by multiple men), fathers failing to take responsibility for their offspring, and a nanny state philosophy.

Real Americans recognize the need for and support law enforcement, understanding that civil society requires willing obedience from its members.  Elsewhere, the liberals condemn law enforcement; celebrate the death of police officers; advocate looting, stealing, and property damage as forms of protest; and condone riots as "freedom of expression."

Real Americans recognize that one gets out of life what he/she puts into it, that achievement is directly related to effort, that self-esteem is directly derived from accomplishment.  Elsewhere, liberals believe that simply being is reason for being provided the products of the efforts of others.  

Real Americans seek opportunities to celebrate our great nation, proudly standing during the National Anthem, and display the American flag.  Elsewhere, liberals criticize our nation at every turn, condemn our success, and demand home owners remove displayed American flags.

Real Americans honor our veterans.  Elsewhere, liberals seek to use veterans for political benefit.

Real Americans simply want to be left free to pursue the American dream.  Elsewhere, liberals seek to use government, laws, and regulation to stifle the natural freedom inherent to the pursuit of the American dream.

Real Americans accept and embrace Martin Luther King's dream that we not be judged by the color of out skins, but by the content of our character.  Elsewhere, liberals seek to inject racism where it does not exist, to inflame through rhetoric, to create tension where none exists, to judge people by the color of their skin.
    

The real America

Southern California

26 March 2016

By rough counts, 280 bikers (many, if not most of them veterans) came together to escort fallen Marine Corps Staff Sergeant Louis Cardin home from his arrival at March Air Reserve Base today.  In a first, the hundreds of bikes were permitted to enter the base for this special mission.  

As the procession made its way south on I-215 from the base to Route 74, it was so massive that law enforcement essentially shut down a long stretch of the freeway, before it turned east towards the small town of Hemet.  As we rolled down I-215, each and every overpass was crowded with American flags, countless people, and even a few firetrucks and first-responders.  Some people in the vehicles heading north on the opposite side of the freeway had pulled off, with many standing and saluting the procession.

Continuing to roll through the small towns on Route 74, hundreds and hundreds of people turned out to pay their respects.  American flags were plentiful, with people noted for standing at attention, saluting, or placing their hands over their hearts in tribute to this fallen Marine. 

Old and young, men and women, children and grandparents.  These real Americans took time today to stand in the sun in a display of condolence.  They halted their cars along the road in both directions.  No one complained about the momentary disruption on a Saturday afternoon.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3We5epc_duI

No matter what politicians and others may say, middle America...small town America...is real and very patriotic.  These communities recognize and honor the service and sacrifice of their soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines.

The first-responders came out in force, from beginning to end.  As we rolled, law enforcement and fire departments helped stop and direct traffic, as they too honored Staff Sergeant Cardin.

Talking to one local resident after Staff Sergeant Cardin was safely delivered to the destination, I was told the procession "seemed to go on and on."  Funny, though, some were highly conspicuous by their absence.  I did not see one elected official in the procession.  

I did see ordinary people.  I did see men, women, and children.  I did see veterans, young and old.  I did see soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines.  I did see the Air Force Security Police saluting as we rolled by.  I did see riders of all races.  I did see the Patriot Guard Riders.  I did see the American Legion Riders.  I did see the VFW Riders.  I did see many military themed biker groups.  I did see flags flying from bikes.  I did see the Marine Corps Honor Guard.  I did see somber members of the community paying their respects to a fallen Marine.

I did see the real America.