Harsh Reality

Friday, November 27, 2015

Links for Tonight's Show on 93WIBC.

Here are links for topics we're going to talk about on tonight's program. Join us! 4p-7p on 93.1FM in Indianapolis, 93WIBC.com or check us out on your favorite radio streaming app!

Study says men eat more when women are around.

Black Friday rioting

University cancels classes over online debate about a mascot
THIS is the only "gun" that was turned in. Yes, it's a BB gun.
University provides counseling to students traumatized by seeing a sticker on a kid's laptop.
Ivy League university student claims she's been traumatized by reading about white people  in her studies.

H.S. student banned by Superintendent from cheerleading for expressing an opinion on her private social media about local election.

Thursday, November 19, 2015

Front Row Seats for Our Own Destruction

Some thoughts on the controversy of American Governors publicly refusing to allow the settlement of Syrian refugees in their states:

It seems to me to be grandstanding. Because it seems too little, too late. I'm a very practical man. And I'm also firmly rooted in reality. I try to view things from a rational point of view instead of an emotional one. The reality is that Muslims are pouring into the U.S. and Europe from several different Middle-Eastern nations. But Syria is being singled out. I'm not sure how much terrorism in America is committed by Syrians. But it seems odd to me to refuse to take them now. Not that I'm in favor of them continuing to come here. But it seems that limiting Muslim immigration to just Syrians doesn't really guarantee anything.

Fifteen of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. One of the wealthiest nations on Earth that's not at war. Another two were from the United Arab Emirates (another fabulously wealthy nation at peace) and another was from Egypt, which is a U.S. ally. They all entered the United States legally, lived here among us peacefully while they prepared to kill as many as possible in the most spectacular terrorist attack in human history. Different nations, but one religion.

The Tsarnaev brothers immigrated to America as muslim refugee children with their parents. They were taken in as refugees, enjoyed the safety and protection of the United States, helped themselves to government assistance including welfare and food stamps and student loans and grants to go to college. All the while, the brothers planned to wage jihad against innocent civilians. They detonated a homemade bomb at the Boston Marathon, killing and injuring spectators and athletes. A different nation yet again, but the same religion.

Muhammad Youssef Abdul-Azeez also immigrated to America as a child with his parents. He was born in Kuwait - arguably the wealthiest nation on Earth. His parents were Palestinians. He was welcomed in and was naturalized as a U.S. citizen. On July 16th, 2015 he initiated a terrorist attack against U.S. military personnel in Chattanooga, Tennessee, killing four Marines and a U.S. Navy sailor.

Nidal Hassan is the child of Palestinian immigrants to America. He joined the U.S. Army and took advantage of the U.S. military's "Gun Free Zone" policy on bases to murder 13 unarmed U.S. soldiers who were in the hospital and injure another 39. 

Hasna Aitboulahcen was the child of Moroccan immigrants to France. Her friends and neighbors described her as helpful and peaceful. A completely Westernized happy Muslim who liked to wear cowboy hats. They all expressed shock when they learned that she was a terrorist and helped carry out the bloody attacks in Paris on November 13th, 2015. She idolized the Charlie Hebdo terrorist murderers and professed her support for ISIS. When she was tracked down by police she screamed at officers and detonated her suicide vest blowing herself up and collapsing part of the building she was cornered in. Again, different country but the same religion.

In Kentucky, federal law enforcement arrested two Iraqi "refugees" on terrorism charges after they tried to purchase machine guns and other heavy weaponry to kill Americans. Both were al Qaeda members who'd killed Americans in Iraq.

Hassan was actually a natural-born American citizen and Aitboulahcan was a natural-born French citizen. But none of that mattered. They seethed with hatred for their own birthplace and the people who took in their parents. Many nations. Different statuses. Immigrants, students, natural-born, naturalized...one religion. One final result.

So Indiana Governor Mike Pence and 20-some other state governors' refusal to take in Syrian refugees seems oddly specific to me. My initial reaction was "why have you been allowing them up to now?" Another question is the ultimate effectiveness of keeping them from settling in Indiana. Other places in the U.S. are welcoming as many Syrians as will come. Once they're in the U.S., what's to keep them from coming to one of the states where they were initially denied? Nothing. Finally, I'm not sure what good it does to limit one's objection to just Syrian refugees. The terror attacks have come from Muslims of all nationalities and backgrounds.

Like insisting that one particular sub-species of piranha not be dropped into your corner of the swimming pool while allowing every other species to be dumped in by the truckload. And the offending species is being freely released in other parts of the pool. If the goal is to keep your citizens from being attacked, such weak demands - no matter how strenuously made - will ultimately have no effect on their safety. It just seems like pointless grandstanding.

Monday, November 9, 2015

Gay Rights Agenda: Lucy Van Pelt Holding the Football For America's Charlie Brown

This is a transcript of the November 9th, 2015 episode of the Harsh Reality podcast. You can listen to it here.

Have you ever heard the phrase "enough is enough"? Or maybe some variant of it?

I always think "enough is never enough" whenever I hear the latest demand of the gay rights jihad being screamed to get the jihadists their next fix. Just like Lucy holding the football for poor Charlie Brown, the end result is always the same. And they'll say anything they need to say in order to get us all to go along with their promise that this time it'll be different. The promise, of course, is that [insert latest demand] is all they want. And you're being paranoid and ridiculous if you think that we would ever try to [whatever next step in the agenda is].

And then they pull the football away. Again. And the cycle repeats as they start with the next demand.

All I can do is shake my head at the latest demand in the never-ending saga of gay demands.

As you are no doubt aware, last week the City of Houston's proposed transgender (nee: men dressing as women and demanding to be treated as a woman) rights ordinance suffered a huge defeat at the ballot box. Not even close. A landslide. Of common sense. In a nutshell, the lesbian mayor of Houston decided that any bathroom in the city was for anyone, no matter their gender or intentions. She famously attacked city churches who opposed her by issuing subpoenas for their sermons, notes, books, papers, etc. Just as in the Proposition 8 fiasco in California a few years ago where marriage was defined by voters in the state Constitution as between one man & one woman, the polls showed overwhelming support for the gay position on the matter, but when it came time to vote in the privacy of the voting booth, traditional values won overwhelming victories. I could write an entire book on the psychology and sociology behind this phenomenon. Suffice it to say that political correctness has most everyone scared to say anything except what the liberals in media, academia, etc. tell us is the approved opinion.

You might remember that Proposition 8 was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court. But how did it get there? Gays tried to get married, but couldn't. So they sued, claiming that their rights were being violated. They kept filing suit until a sympathetic California state court ruled in their favor. That was appealed up. The California Supreme Court agreed that it was unconstitutional under the state Constitution to not issue licenses for gays to marry each other. Notwithstanding that they had exactly the same rights as everyone else. They just didn't like their choices and sued to add additional choices that they found more to their taste. But I digress. In response to the California Supreme Court finding that gay marriage was a right under the state's Constitution, opponents filed to add a Constitutional Amendment to the ballot that would once and for all define marriage. This was necessary because there was nothing in the Constitution stating otherwise, but the state Supreme Court had invented the right by their own "interpretation". The measure was deemed Proposition 8 and seemed to have zero chance of passing in ultra-liberal California. To the shock of everyone in media and leftist politics, Prop 8 passed and officially amended the California Constitution. Settling the matter once and for all, one would think. But, just like Lucy with the football, there's always another level. Gay advocates then sued the state of California in a friendly federal court claiming that their federal Constitutional rights were being violated by the California Constitution. That case worked its way through the courts and the U.S. Supreme Court famously struck down that part of the California Constitution, finding that there was a previously unknown right of every American to "marry" a person of the same sex.

This pattern of never stopping, never giving up, never going away, never letting a defeat - no matter how crushing - in a courtroom, at the ballot box or in public opinion, ever deter from the immediate goal or pushing onward for the next goal has become the hallmark of the gay movement. And of most liberal causes, actually. In Houston, for example, the mayor and her gay allies are asking the NFL to boycott the city of Houston and move Super Bowl LI in 2017 to another city in solidarity with gays. The NFL said no.

I've been thinking about this because an acquaintance is participating in a Houston-style push for mentally ill men to have access to little girls' bathrooms in Indiana by amending the Indiana civil rights laws to include transgendered people. Basically, what this law will do is force businesses to let men hang out in whatever bathroom they want based on what gender they feel like they are that day. Anyone who says "no", will be violating the civil rights of the confused person. Here's a campaign ad by the Houston residents opposed to this nonsense:

My friend, in his push to let men join girls in the toilets, tried to stamp out any discussion of the civil rights law he's proposing being used to force churches to perform gay marriages. He claims that the proposed language specifically exempts churches from the law.

But I'm sure we're all familiar with these exemptions in other areas. Remember your local smoking bans? They exempted open-air spaces like stadiums and parks. They also exempted bars, restaurants, bowling alleys, private clubs and casinos. Seatbelt laws were originally never to be enforced in trucks (to get past the resistance of farmers) or as a primary infraction to stop motorists (to get past the objections of civil libertarians). Gun control advocates exempted private sales and other forms of firearm purchases in order to get their laws passed, but now call those exemptions loopholes and blame them for the failure of their laws to do what they promised. But little by little, every single one of those exemptions have been re-labeled as "loopholes" and been closed one by one. Until we find ourselves strangled by laws that could never have been passed without those exemptions. The unspoken rule is that they'll forego those "exemptions" now, but come back later and close them up as "loopholes" in the law that the citizens are abusing.

Another habit of the left is the never-ending promise that this demand is all they want. And that suggestions of the next logical step in the process is ludicrous and that nobody would ever suggest such a thing. It's called incrementalism. It's when you get just a tiny concession, but then build on that concession with other small steps in order to reach some ultimate goal that could never be obtained all at once. It's always derided as the logical fallacy of the slippery slope. But I don't know how it can be a fallacy in the world of American liberal politics because it always actually occurs.

Let's take a look back at how this matter with the gay rights agenda has progressed.

In 1991 I was in law school and the big debate was over the relatively recent case of Bowers v. Hardwick and whether the Supreme Court should overturn state laws criminalizing homosexual conduct. The liberals in class all howled that gays didn't want anything from anybody and just wanted to behave in private however they wanted. They ridiculed those who argued that states would be able to make whatever laws they want or that, if someone wanted a Constitutional right to engage in homosexual acts, that they should amend the Constitution to include such a right. I specifically recall my liberal classmates arguing that "nobody was going to be gay in public" or wanted anything from anyone except to be left alone. Shortly thereafter, the Vermont civil union matter arose and states objected that full faith and credit was going to force states to recognize gay marriage.

That caused the federal Defense of Marriage Act that liberals all lined up to sign into law in order to placate conservatives as a bunch of illiterate hillbillies who were too stupid to understand that gays were not asking - and would never ask - for gay marriage and that such an unthinkable idea would never even be suggested, much less forced on any state that didn't want it. Liberals all laughed about how stupid it was to even suggest that states' individual choices needed protecting from something that was never going to happen.

About that same time, President Clinton pushed Don't Ask Don't Tell for military service, saying that gays just wanted to be left alone and had no desire to be out of the closet. They just didn't want to be investigated, only left alone to their own private lives. Promises were made that any idea that homosexuality would be decriminalized was just uneducated and irrational conservatives being paranoid and having no idea of the simple, private peace that gays wanted.

Then with the gay marriage push, there was the dismissive condescension that gays getting married would have no impact whatsoever on anyone else's life and that these marriages should be nobody else's business. Immediately, though, the lawsuits, regulatory fines and boycotts began going after bakeries, photographers, pizza shops, Chik-fil-A and anyone else who didn't tow the gay mafia line.

So, you'll forgive me for being unconvinced by liberal claims that their latest jihad will have no effect on other things in our community or culture. It will. It always does. Every single time. And no matter what you say, government force is the opposite of freedom. Advocating forcing citizens to do something makes you an enemy of freedom. No matter how you label it.

You may choose to believe Lucy's promises that she won't pull away the football this time, but you'll forgive me for not being fooled anymore and refusing to try to kick it with you. And I can't promise that I won't say "I told ya so" while you lie flat on your back and liberals convince you to get up and come and try to kick it again.

Friday, November 6, 2015

A Free Idea for Donald Trump for His Appearance on SNL

By now, you might've seen the news item that an illegal alien advocacy group has promised $5,000 to anyone who yells "Trump is a racist!" during his appearance on Saturday Night Live. I've got a great idea for Trump and everyone in the studio audience. First, though, here's the offer:
“NBC’s refusal to drop Trump has put us in the position of dropping $5,000 of cold hard cash to anyone who will yell out ‘Trump is a racist’ during the live broadcast of ‘Saturday Night Live,’ said Santiago Cejudo, an organizer for the Deport Racism PAC, on Wednesday.
 “We’re hoping the $5,000 will help people on set or in the studio audience find the bravery to speak out loudly and help focus the national conversation on that we need to deport racism, not people,” he added.
Here's the story at TheHill.com:

If I was ‪Trump‬, I'd organize the entire studio audience and all of the SNL cast and camera crew and writers and everyone to come on camera and have everyone all say "Trump is a racist" together at the same time. Do a split screen so you can see the entire audience, the crew, everyone in the booth all holding up their end of the bargain. It would be important to take down everyone's name, then send a demand for everyone to get their $5,000.

It's an easy way that Trump can put $5,000 in every single person's pocket in the entire studio! If this group doesn't pay every last person who participates - including Trump - then Trump can bankroll a lawsuit on behalf of everyone for breach of contract.

I would love to see this group pay Donald Trump $5,000 for taking them up on their offer.

Wednesday, November 4, 2015

Whatever Happened to MYOB? Social Justice Warriors Destroying American Culture

Transcript of November 4th, 2015 Harsh Reality podcast. You can listen to it here.

Do you remember being a kid and being told to MYOB? That is, "mind your own business"?

It was a foundation of American culture. Along the lines of "Don't be a tattletale", "Keep your hands to yourself", "Treat others the way you would have them treat you", "If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all" and maybe 100 other informal social rules that permeated American culture. Ingrained and often repeated to the point that good citizens would recognize and disprove of someone who violated these cultural boundaries.

Notice the common denominator in all these rules? It's respect for individuals. Respect for their personal property. Respect of their personal opinions. Respect of their physical person. Respect for the larger community to not drag them in to your personal drama. Do what you want, but mind you own business and leave other people to theirs. Especially when they're not asking for your opinion.

Whatever happened to that?

There's this thing out there called being a social justice warrior. "SJW" for short. These people are the opposite of everything described above. Your business is their personal business. Everything you do in life is for them to judge and either approve or disapprove. There is nothing off limits to them. What you do in your bedroom, what you eat, how you raise your children, how you vote, what you drive, where you work and what funny pictures you share with your friends on social media are all their personal business. At least, they think it is. And they act accordingly. For lack of a better illustration, it's the stiflingly fascist politically correct culture that's infected American campuses for the past few decades, only it's on steroids and wandered off the campus and into the streets, businesses and neighborhoods of America. You've no doubt seen it. And maybe even experienced it.

Here are some examples of how it goes:

"I've never been to South Carolina and I'm not black and I have zero personal connection in any way to the Confederate battle flag, BUT I'M OFFENDED ON BEHALF OF PEOPLE IN THAT STATE AND DEMAND YOU TAKE DOWN THAT FLAG!";




"I don't hunt and I've never been to Africa, BUT I'M OFFENDED ON BEHALF OF (????lions????) AND DEMAND THAT HUNTERS BE PROSECUTED FOR KILLING ANIMALS!"


Remember the Chik-fil-A "controversy"? The (now deceased) octogenarian founder of the restaurant chain merely mentioned his personal belief in traditional marriage in his church bulletin, or some such. But that was more than enough to set off the explosion of outrage and boycotts. His personal opinion was not tolerated. His family's business was attacked. His employees nationwide were subjected to hate-filled rants and threats. Former Obama Chief of Staff and current Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel banned Chik-fil-A from Chicago.

Notice the theme? Sure, there's the moral superiority element. But America could just laugh this off except these idiots have managed to get the muscle of the government behind them. Whether it's lawsuits in our courts or regulatory harassment by government agencies or actual laws passed by their liberal politicians at whatever level. The common denominator in all this is that the leftist, liberal, socialist point of view is the "correct" or approved opinion and any other points of view are slowly being made illegal. The enforcement mechanisms are through the government. The storm troopers are the social justice warriors who roam through social media, the hallways at work and school and through our neighborhoods looking for something to be offended about.

And they come in all several varieties. The feminist variety is one of the more virulent strains. There's the racial antagonist who throws around accusations of "racist" at anyone he disagrees with about anything or is just personally offended by. And this works for several racial identity groups. That Gutierrez guy in Congress is an example of a hispanic SJW. Or "clock boy"'s dad. Anyone who wants to be a famous and gets on TV calling everyone racist is an example of a SJW. But there's also the angry gay crowd, animal rights people, environmental activists. Pretty much anyone who's angry and accusing people of being something-"ist".

This is a sickness. Unimportant little people who make themselves feel important by using the government and courts to bully everyone else into living their lives the way the social justice warrior thinks they should. I want to start a trend. Everyone should mind their own business. In everything.

And it's having a tremendous impact on American culture. I always like to reach back into history and find examples of where people have done the same or similar things in the past and how that turned out. There is, as they say, nothing new under the sun. But I'm not able to come up with anything like this at any time in human history. This idea that everything is now everyone's collective business. I simply can't come up with an example of this having happened before. The Stasi?  The KGB? Big Brother in George Orwell's "1984"? 

But those were all a fascist oppression of the population. In modern America the population is judging, bullying and suing each other into conformity. It's a strange phenomenon.

I suppose the East German Stasi is probably the closest thing to the SJW phenomenon, even though it's not a perfect analogy. Here's a link to the wikipedia article about it. It was evil. The population living in a constant state of paranoia because East Germans never knew when it would be their turn to be hauled away for words or thoughts or actions that were unapproved.

But whereas the Stasi operated in secret SJWs have been emboldened to publicly attack anyone who expresses an incorrect opinion or behaves in a manner unapproved by whomever they see as their authority. It's exploded out of control over the past few years. Corresponding with the election of a man who is, effectively, their god. A man who encourages his minions to attack anyone who deviates from the approved conformity. Once their target is selected, all that is necessary is for them to come up with a way that there is somehow a "victim" of the target's thoughts, words or actions, and then go on the attack ostensibly defending that "victim". Whether their alleged victim wants their help or is even a victim at all. And this holds true even though the thought or words or action may have absolutely nothing to do with them, they assert their moral authority to judge and condemn their target simply based on their moral superiority. It's out of control.

Author, lecturer and columnist James Howard Kunstler has the best article I've ever read on this phenomenon here: http://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/good-little-maoists/ He writes:
"There is no American Mao, but there are millions of good little Maoists all over America bent on persecuting anyone who departs from a party line that now dominates the bubble of campus life. It’s a weird home-grown mixture of Puritan witch-hunting, racial paranoia, and sexual hysteria, and it comes loaded with a lexicon of jargon — “micro-aggression,” “trigger warnings,” “speech codes,” etc — designed to enforce uniformity in thinking, and to punish departures from it.

...[C]ampus life is preoccupied with handwringing over the hurt feelings of every imaginable ethnic and sexual group and just as earnestly with the suppression of ideological trespassers who don’t go along with the program of exorcisms. A comprehensive history of this unfortunate campaign has yet to be written, but by the time it is, higher education may lie in ruins. It is already burdened and beset by the unintended consequences of the financial racketeering so pervasive across American life these days. But in promoting the official suppression of ideas, it is really committing intellectual suicide, disgracing its mission to civilized life."
Even the very concept of MYOB seems to have vanished from American culture. 

So, where does it go from here? You can't reason with these people because they're irrational and they don't want to hear anything you have to say. No explanation, no defense. They just want you to take their beating because the whole point of what they're doing is to make an example of you for anyone else who might have a different opinion from them.

Arguing with them is pointless, because you are necessarily letting them set the agenda. Not smart. Best bet is to stay away from them. Block them on social media. Don't politely listen to their tirades. And, whatever you do, do not introduce this infection into your place of business or social group. People with an inability to MYOB are like an infectious disease and the SJW stain will cheerfully destroy lives, careers, businesses and friendships.

I want to start a trend. Of everyone minding their own business. Re-introducing that formerly great American cultural character trait of not sticking our noses in other peoples' business. Maybe if enough people practice this and it becomes normal again, combined with the refusal to even give the social justice warriors an audience about their disapproval of us or anyone else, maybe be can vaccinate enough people to effectively end this disease.