Advertisement

When is it okay and not at all racist to smear accomplished Latina women? Why, when they’re conservatives and you’re fatuous liberals from the New York Times who are obviously terrified of their success.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/07/06/rep-mayra-flores-rips-new-york-times-for-article-labeling-her-far-right-latina/

Also, check out this perfect illustration of the Times’ glaring double standard between the way it treats a socialist Latina who spouts nonsense 24/7 and conservative Latinas who are pro-life churchgoers.

https://instapundit.com/529892/

Is it any surprise that Latino voters are turning Republican?

I never want to hear another word about how Donald Trump was a dictator who ignored the Constitutional limits of power and destroyed the “norms” of our institutions. Trump was repeatedly blocked from exercising powers he clearly held by activist judges, and every time, he followed the law and appealed to a higher court, which usually upheld his right to do what he was doing.

President Biden, on the other hand, Mr. “Return to Normalcy,” has repeatedly shown utter contempt for the limits of his powers, the separation of powers, and the rulings of the Supreme Court. If a ruling doesn’t go his way, he ignores it, tries to find ways around it, and in certain extreme cases, calls for destroying the SCOTUS by eliminating the Senate filibuster so he can pack the Court with leftwing activists, all while suggesting the Judges are illegitimate and doing nothing to protect them from illegal threats and protests at their homes. He’s been a wrecking ball aimed at our institutions and the Constitutional separation of powers. And now, he’s doing it again.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-executive-action-abortion-access-pressure-democrats

Apparently, the SCOTUS ruling that abortion is an intimate personal matter not mentioned in the Constitution and is therefore rightly the concern of elected state legislators means nothing to Biden. He plans to issue an executive order today, making it easier for women (sorry: “birthing people,” or in this case, “non-birthing people”) to get abortions in states that limit them.

Check out that link for the details, and while you’re there, take note of how many misleadingly positive euphemisms for “abortion” the White House manages to cram into this one statement. For instance, “reproductive health care services," “medical help,” “reproductive rights,” “access to the medication they need” (i.e., abortifacient drugs), and “the freedom to travel to seek the care they need" (crossing state lines to get an abortion, which they would be able to do anyway because all Americans have the right to cross state borders freely.)

This is a point I just keep hammering on: if liberals honestly believe that abortion is good and moral, why do they steadfastly refuse to say clearly what it is that they’re talking about?

Related: Sen. Elizabeth Warren has gone so far off the deep end that she’s not only defending the killing of babies in the womb (that’s what abortion is – see, our side has no problem telling you honestly what we’re talking about), she’s declared outright war on pro-life pregnancy centers and wants to shut them all down.

These centers offer a wide range of needed care to millions of struggling mothers and families, but Warren doesn’t care about all the good they’re done and are doing for so many people. She hates them with an insane, blind rage for the simple reason that they don’t offer abortion. That’s not a defensible political position, and it’s certainly not an expression of concern for women or their health care needs. It’s a mental illness.

Paula Bolyard at PJ Media has more, including an accounting of all the vital services these centers offer, from free ultrasounds to prenatal counseling to diapers, formula and even baby furniture. Warren wants to shut all that down just because they refuse to kill babies in the womb. That’s not “pro-choice,” because she recognizes only one choice. That’s “pro-death.” It’s sick and monstrous.  

https://pjmedia.com/columns/paula-bolyard/2022/07/07/liz-warren-the-right-refuses-to-help-pregnant-people-also-liz-warren-shut-down-all-the-crisis-pregnancy-centers-n1611137

Some other important points from this article: Stacey Abrams has made shutting down pro-life pregnancy centers part of her platform for Governor of Georgia, so take note, Georgia voters. Also, the donations and volunteers that make these centers possible prove what a huge lie the leftists are telling when they claim conservatives and Christians don’t care about the mothers or about babies after they’re born.

And while I’m at it, let me blow up yet another leftist lie, that babies that aren’t aborted will grow up unwanted and unloved. At any given time in the US, there are between 1 and 2 million couples on waiting lists to adopt a baby. Even if there were a morally defensible justification for abortion, that fact alone would disintegrate it.

https://adoption-for-my-baby.com/how-to/find-adoptive-parents-for-my-baby/how-many-families-in-the-u-s-are-waiting-to-adopt/

When I was growing up, my bedtime ritual always included a fairy tale that started with “Once upon a time...” and ended with the comforting words we all remember: “And they lived happily ever after.” As a child of the optimistic 1950s, I dreamed that life might be like that: whatever obstacles, dangers or perils might come my way, in the end, I would live happily ever after.

There were certainly plenty of struggles along the way, but I have to say that things did eventually work out even more happily than I could have imagined, from a career that I love to a wonderful family, including the world’s greatest grandkids. But sadly, for many people, “living happily ever after” does seem like an unobtainable fairy tale. Why is that happy ending growing ever more out-of-reach for so many people?

Of course, there are always factors beyond our control, like health problems and accidents. None of us can ever know if our birthday or Christmas celebration was the last we’ll ever enjoy. We have no way of knowing when it will all end, only that someday, it will (that’s why it’s said that the only certainties in life are death and taxes.)

Well, I can’t help you with your taxes, but I do have a bit of advice that I think will make death less frightening and greatly increase your chances of living “happily ever after.”

For decades, our nation has been focused on personal pleasure. The message drummed into everyone by pop culture is, “If it feels good, do it.” It’s fostered a culture of self-centeredness that led to Baby Boomers being nicknamed “The Me Generation.” Today’s young people have been dubbed “iGen” because many are so fixated on self and selfies that even their gadgets’ names all start with “I.” Advertising bombards us with the message that life is all about me and all about now. Such messages of immediate self-gratification may sell products and services, but they cause us to sell our souls if we follow this philosophy to its logical conclusion.

At some point in life, we all experience events that shake up our routine, much like the agitator in a washing machine shakes loose the grime in our clothes. We may not want or enjoy such experiences, but they’re necessary to force us to focus on the frailty of life and the certainty of death. They also force us to begin asking what really matters and why.

If we react to setbacks based solely on what feels good right now, we greatly lower our chances of enjoying a happy future. But if we believe there is even a remote possibility that our actions have lasting implications beyond the immediate, both within and beyond our lifetimes, it should cause us to think differently, live differently, and leave a different kind of legacy.

Without apology, I believe that the spiritual side of our lives really does matter. To believe otherwise is to define humans as little more than animated protoplasm, going through the motions of life for no particular purpose. I prefer to believe there’s more to us than flesh and blood. If we possess a soul capable of living beyond our lifetimes, then the seeds we plant in this life will yield fruit forever. If you believe those things, the ultimate becomes more important than the immediate.

When we decide to live beyond our lifetimes, our responsibilities to the next generation will outweigh our roles in our current jobs. More important than the money we’re paid for our work is what we will become as a result of our work. Our character will become more important than the careers we follow.

For all of us, life began “once upon a time.” Unlike the fairy tales, however, it’s up to us to make the choices that determine whether the last line of our life stories will read, “And they lived happily ever after.”

(Adapted from the book, “Rare, Medium or Done Well: Make the Most of your Life.”)

There are a lot of things people like to believe that are patently absurd if you think about it. Much of the Obama Administration was based on making confident declarations – we can’t just drill our way out of an energy shortage, it would take a magic wand to bring back manufacturing jobs, 2 percent growth is the “new normal,” etc. – all delivered in a somber, imperious tone that made them sound like unassailable truth, when in fact, all of them were patently false.

One of the most common pieces of false conventional wisdom is that “the government can’t legislate morality!” But of course, they do it all the time. We have millions of laws, just to enforce society’s consensus of what’s morally right or wrong. Liberals used to protest this, and now they’re the chief generators of morality laws, usually bans on everything they find morally offensive, including smoking, using racist words or an unpreferred pronoun, giving someone an unrequested plastic straw, attending a protest for a cause they personally disagree with, etc. etc. etc. Each law comes with loopholes, so government adds more laws to close them. Plus we’ll need police, courts and jails, because some people will always insist on doing the wrong thing anyway. All to legislate morality.

(I know, today’s liberals want to do away with police and jails, but that’s just for actual criminals. They still want to arrest and jail law-abiding citizens who exercise rights they disapprove of, like reopening their gyms, salons and barber shops.)

Self-government requires self-discipline, self-respect, and respect for others. When people don’t follow an accepted standard moral code, government keeps passing new laws to try to force them to, which creates bigger government and more expense and less freedom for everybody. Maybe the national debt wouldn’t be sky high now if our behavior standards hadn’t sunk so low.

How much do people’s bad personal choices end up costing all the rest of us? You might be surprised at the size of the bill. When I left the governor’s office in Arkansas, we had more than 13,000 inmates in the Department of Corrections. Just keeping them locked up cost taxpayers more than $220 million a year. That’s more than it would have cost to send 13,000 kids to any college in the state, all expenses paid. If every prison inmate had just lived a moral life and stayed out of trouble, the taxpayers could have enjoyed a $220 million tax cut. Or the money might have been used to improve roads and services that benefit everyone.

From the left, I’d always hear that we should spend more money on prisoners or else turn more of them loose. From the right, I’d hear that we should lock up more people and eliminate parole while cutting the prison budget. Both were unrealistic. But hardly anyone wanted to talk about the real problem: the lack of morality that led to all those people being locked up in the first place.

And what about juvenile offenders? Every kid placed into our Division of Youth Services cost taxpayers up to $80,000 a year. If they’d all had stable, nurturing homes and been taught to be obedient, responsible and moral, it would’ve saved the taxpayers of just that one state $80 million a year. Imagine how many parks we could have built for all kids to enjoy, or how many books we could’ve bought for school libraries, if we could’ve freed up $80 million a year in the state budget.

A lot of kids get into trouble because of peer pressure, which social media and Twitter mob shaming have made even more oppressive. They think breaking the rules makes them look cool and that they will never face any consequences for it. So kids, when someone you know starts acting up, instead of rewarding them with your admiration or covering for them with your silence, please have the courage to stand up and say, “That’s not cool! Thanks for costing us our parks and turning our generation into tax slaves, jerk!”

Hey, as long as kids are going to be vulnerable to peer pressure, why not use its power for good?

As a rock music fan, I enjoy Pink Floyd. But “We don’t need no education” is bad advice for life.

When our kids graduate school, they no longer just have to compete with each other. They now compete in a global marketplace. Not only have low-skilled jobs moved abroad where labor is cheap, but to attract new high-paying, tech-based jobs to America (or even to work online), our kids need an education as good or better than students get in China, India, Israel and other nations. Sadly, our schools are not giving them the tools they need to compete in the 21st century.

I have a friend who owns a printing business. He gives job applicants a pencil and ruler, and asks them to mark an eighth of an inch, a sixteenth of an inch and other simple measurements on a piece of paper. He tells me that no more than one out of ten even has a clue what he’s talking about. If America’s students can get a high school diploma without knowing basic fractions, then all we’re equipping them to achieve is a fraction of the American Dream.

Of course, the cry always goes up, “We need to spend more on education!” But we already spend over $550 billion a year, more than 4 percent of the gross domestic product. If money equaled results, then Washington, DC, should be crawling with junior Einsteins. DC public schools spend over $30,000 per student per year, or $10,000 more than the tuition for an in-state graduate degree from the University of Virginia. Yet DC’s reading, writing and math scores are well below the national average. Money alone doesn’t fix the problem.

Those who are obsessed with “income inequality” want to tear down those who earn more, but have no ideas for helping those who earn less. Well, here’s one: finish high school! Nearly a third of US students drop out. Over their lives, they’ll earn, on average, a quarter million dollars less than high school graduates. They’re also more likely to suffer ill health, get involved in drugs and crime, and die nine years younger. Staying in school benefits both them and society.

But if we want students to learn, then schools have to make them want to learn. To ignite their curiosity and turn them into lifelong seekers of knowledge. That takes both involved parents and competent teachers who are rewarded for good results. Kids need to be taught how to think, not just memorize standardized tests. They also need to be taught real facts and real history, not trendy racist, socialist and anti-American propaganda.

Dropping arts and music classes is the most short-sighted budget cut a school can make. Studies show that music class helps kids do better in other subjects, develop social skills, and stay in school longer. It might also improve the current dismal state of pop music. We must remember that schools exist for the students, not for the teachers’ unions or the education bureaucracy (so open the schools and stop letting the unions keep them closed.) And we need to keep most decisions about education at the state and local levels, with close parental involvement, so they’re made by people who know the students best.

If you think that doesn’t matter, look at all the home-schooled students winning academic contests. Home is as local as you can get, yet those students are more than ready to compete on the world stage. Don’t you want your kids to be?