One of America's Greatest Pastimes, Early Polling...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

American's are an interesting bunch. Stubborn and fickle at the same time. Especially Republicans. But then again I question just why in the hell anyone is concerning themselves with the 2016 presidential race two years out? I guess it's because we're... Americans?

Public Policy Polling -

PPP's newest look at the Republican field for 2016 finds some big changes from our previous polling. Marco Rubio, who had led all of our polling since December, has dropped all the way to 6th place. Rand Paul now has the lead nationally, to go along with the leads he posted in our most recent Iowa and New Hampshire polls. And Ted Cruz has already hit double digits.

The numbers are: Paul 16, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, and Paul Ryan each at 13, Cruz at 12, Rubio at 10, Rick Santorum and Bobby Jindal at 4, and Susana Martinez at 2. Cruz has proven to be such a darling to the far right that he actually already leads among 'very conservative' voters with 20% to 18% for Paul and 17% for Ryan. Christie gets 24% with 'moderate' identifying Republicans but doesn't do better overall because he's at just 7% with 'very conservative' ones.

Rubio was at 21 or 22% on all of our polls between January and March but his support has now dropped to half that level. Meanwhile Paul has vaulted into the lead after starting the year at only 5% in our polling, perhaps owing to the positive attention he received from conservatives after his filibuster earlier this year. Christie and Bush have remained consistently in the 12-15% range in all of our polling.
The Republicans are looking more competitive with Hillary Clinton than they were in some of our earlier polling this year. She still leads all of the GOP hopefuls but in many of the cases it's by tight margins- 1 point over Chris Christie at 43/42, 2 points over Paul Ryan at 46/44, 3 points over Jeb Bush at 44/41, 5 points over Marco Rubio at 45/40, and 8 points over Rand Paul at 47/39. Obviously it's early but you can see a picture here that's been painted in many key Senate races over the last two cycles- the person with the most support from Republicans is also the weakest general election candidate.

Joe Biden does on average 6 points worse than Hillary against the various Republican possibilities. He trails Christie by 6 points at 45/39, Bush by 4 points at 45/41, and Ryan by 3 points at 46/43. He does at least manage ties with Paul and Rubio at 43% and 42% respectively.

Clinton continues to dominate the Democratic race, although her 40 point lead this month is down a bit from 50 and 46 points on our previous two polls. She's at 52% to 12% for Biden, 6% for Elizabeth Warren, 5% for Kirsten Gillibrand, and 3% for Cory Booker with no one else above 2%.

In a Clinton-less field Biden leads with 34% to 13% for Warren, 10% for Andrew Cuomo, and 4% for Booker with no one else above 3%. And in a field without either Clinton or Biden the leader for the first time is Elizabeth Warren who gets 20% to 11% for Cuomo, 8% for Booker, and 5% for Gillibrand. Full results here

Via: Memeorandum

Oy Vey!!! Again...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

He does it again! Maybe it's in the name?

New York Post - Anthony Weiner came up with an extraordinary excuse yesterday to explain why he went back to sexting after supposedly kicking the habit — he was suffering from marital woes.

In a startling e-mail letter sent to rally campaign supporters, Weiner said he sought hot-blooded female consolation on the Internet when he and his wife, Huma Abedin, hit a rocky patch in their relationship last summer.

At the time, Weiner had been out of Congress for a year, having resigned in disgrace, and was giving interviews with his wife at his side claiming he was cured.

“It was a terrible mistake that I unfortunately returned to during a rough time in our marriage,” Weiner said in the e-mail.

Later, at a press conference, he went into more detail.

“I think that a lot of people see the resignation was the end of the challenges my wife and I, my family faced, and it wasn’t,” Weiner said. “It was part of something that needed to get resolved and frankly it hadn’t been.

“It took some work to get to that place. It wasn’t a function that a certain moment in time came and went. It was a continuum. These things are behind me now.”

A defiant Weiner vowed not to quit the race for mayor despite revelations that he used an online pseudonym — Carlos Danger — to exchange dozens of sexually explicit messages, phone calls and photos with a 22-year-old Indiana woman identified as Sydney Leathers. {Read More}

A PATHETICALLY small unstable man.

Via: Memeorandum

The State of the Economy and ObamaCare...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Yes indeed. Just as some on the left are sounding the clarion call that ObamaCare is working in those states that have embraced it, such as New York and California to name two, polls are indicating that the overall national perception of ObamaCare is a net negative and even shows that some believe it should be repealed.

My own view is that those favoring drastic overhaul or repeal have it about right. In the rush "to do something" We the People ended up with a flawed law being shoved down our throats. This is not a partisan statement as I'm willing to bet (based on the number of democrats that are now balking) that many liberals are questioning the wisdom of passing the legislation they knew little about and whose leader, Rep, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said 'we have to pass the law to know what's in it'. ????? is all I can say about that gem of blind partisan faith and lack of reason.

As President Obama, and our First Lady embark on yet another campaign to sell the ACA (ObamaCare) I say why not let the damn thing meander its way into full implementation and after five or so years analyzing it's impact decide what we should have done. Of course that is assuming ObamaCare ruins the American healthcare system as many (myself included) think it will. But we could be very wrong. Soooooooooo, since we don't know (for sure), why not give the duly elected President of this Great Republic the unfettered opportunity to prove his signature legislation is right for America? Or, let it through the working process show itself to be the failure the republicans, libertarians, and some democrats fear it will be? Don't we owe the PresidentWE elected that opportunity?

ObamaCare at the two minute mark.

CBS News - A new CBS News poll finds more Americans than ever want the Affordable Care Act repealed.

According to the poll, 36 percent of Americans want Congress to expand or keep the health care law while 39 percent want Congress to repeal it - the highest percentage seen in CBS News polls. The poll also found a majority of Americans - 54 percent - disapprove of the health care law, 36 percent of Americans approve of it and 10 percent said they don't know about it.

The health care law is a chronic issue for the White House, CBS News political director John Dickerson said on "CBS This Morning." "There's an operational part to this, which is that the White House has got to get people to sign up for these health exchanges, particularly younger, healthier Americans, and so they are tactically running a campaign much like the presidential campaign, reaching out, using the techniques of that campaign to get younger people to sign up for these health exchanges."

Special Section: Health Care in America

The poll also found just 13 percent of Americans say the health care law will personally "help me" while 38 percent said they believe the law will personally "hurt me."

Dickerson said, "The feeling, basically, is, again, speeches are not going to change public opinion; this has got to start taking hold. People will start signing up and, the White House hopes, good things will start to happen once it kicks in, and that might turn around public opinion, but that's a ways away."

Open enrollment in the Health Insurance Marketplace begins Oct. 1.

Obama hits the road to lay out his economic vision

Via: Memeorandum

Sometimes Ya Just Gotta Shake Your Head and Laugh...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Is it just me or does anybody else think these two guys are flakes?

TPM - According to Rep. Steve King's (R-IA) math, legalizing undocumented immigrants is untenable because for every valedictorian DREAMer -- immigrants brought to the U.S. as children -- there are 100 more who are carrying drugs across the border.

"Some of them are valedictorians, and their parents brought them in," King told Newsmax in an interview last week. "It wasn't their fault. It's true in some cases, but they aren't all valedictorians. They weren't all brought in by their parents."

"For everyone who's a valedictorian, there's another 100 out there that weigh 130 pounds and they’ve got calves the size of cantaloupes because they're hauling 75 pounds of marijuana across the desert,” he continued. “Those people would be legalized with the same act."

So, Representative King, where's the supporting proof behind your statement? Inquiring minds want to know.

Via: Memeorandum

Even Some Left Leaning Publications (or at least their opinion columnists) Get it Right Occasionally...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Rev. Al Sharpton speaks during a news conference outside the Department of Justice while discussing Trayvon Martin case. Sharpton called for the federal government to investigate civil rights charges against George Zimmerman. (Win McNamee / Getty Images / July 16, 2013)

The following article from the opinion pages of the liberal Los Angeles Times is without need of  further comment.

By David A. Lehrer and Joe R. Hicks - During the week since the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the death of Trayvon Martin, the responses to the tragic event, the trial and the verdict have been predictable.

That an unarmed youth lost his life and the perpetrator of the act walked free catalyzed angry and sometimes violent street protests. However unfortunate, that is hardly surprising. The legal nuances of second-degree murder, manslaughter, evidentiary rules and jurors' decisions don't often penetrate through the fog of the 24/7 news cycle. Many people inevitably respond to headlines and passion. There also have been some reasonable discussions of the propriety and impact of "stand your ground" laws and whether Florida's played a role in the verdict.

What isn't reasonable or appropriate is the hysterical response of some civil rights leaders and advocates who have peddled a dishonest and hyperbolic analysis of the tragedy. Unfortunately, their message has been repeated ad nauseam and has become the settled wisdom for some: Young black males are at physical risk in this country, and it is the bigotry of whites that has put a target on their backs.

Jesse Jackson said last year that blacks were "under attack.… Targeting, arresting, convicting blacks and ultimately killing us is big business." Last week he said, "A wave of nameless fear is gripping our country." The musings of Martin Luther King III and the Rev. Al Sharpton echoing the same theme — America is a dangerous place for young black males — have been widely reported. Benjamin Jealous of the NAACP warned that black youth be advised on how to dress and talk, and talked of how hard it is to tell them to be "timid about asserting" their freedom. Tavis Smiley opined that the verdict was "just another piece of evidence of the incontrovertible contempt that this nation often shows and displays for black men."

We received a newsletter from an African American civil rights lawyer who wrote about walking into a convenience store last Saturday night: "Wow. All these people have heard the verdict. Do they now think that I am fair game? Will someone hurt me now that they know that Zimmerman walked?"

What is so insidious about this message of victimhood and division is its dishonesty. Despite the tragic death of Martin under circumstances that no one will ever know the true nature of, there is no "big business" of killing blacks in America. There is no wave of bigotry directed at blacks. All this talk is demagogic posturing, and it's dangerous. Young people will absorb this message and view the "other" with suspicion and fear.

These leaders know, even if many of their adherents might not, that the biggest threat to the lives of young blacks is other young blacks, not white bigots. Between 2000 and 2010, 4,607 black murder victims 17 or younger were killed by other blacks (4,441 of the killers were 17 or younger), according to the Wall Street Journal. There were 340 black victims 17 or younger killed by (non-Latino) whites. That means black youths were 13 times more likely to be killed by a black person than by a white one. {Read More}

Via: Memeorandun

Explain This Liberals...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

The headline and the text below is self sufficient. The ball is again in your court liberals.

AFRICAN AMERICAN NEWS -
Cosby, an outspoken voice on cultural issues, says the recent trial did not prove that Zimmerman had racist motives at any point during his confrontation with Martin. That means race shouldn't be a part of the conversation regarding the case.

"Let's not go into a racial discussion unless we really have something there," he told radio hosts Domenick Nati and Nate Foutz.

Cosby also blasted the news media and said that he had stopped paying attention to "high-profile" court cases after the Casey Anthony murder trial because journalists were so convinced she would be found guilty and yet she was not....

Regarding the Zimmerman trial, Cosby said that he did not think the state of Florida was able to prove its case against him. "I found that the prosecution did not tell the story well. And they lost," Cosby said.

Outspoken former NBA superstar Charles Barkley said he agrees with the verdict in the murder trial of George Zimmerman, but blasted the media for giving platforms to racists to "vent" their ignorance.

Barkley, 50, gave his assessment on the high-profile Florida murder trial to CNBC on Thursday, saying jurors simply did not have enough evidence to convict the former neighborhood watch volunteer in the 2012 killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

"Well I agree with the verdict," Barkley said. "I feel sorry that young kid got killed, but they didn't have enough evidence to charge him. Something clearly went wrong that night -- clearly something went wrong -- and I feel bad for anybody who loses a kid, but if you looked at the case and you don't make it -- there was some racial profiling, no question about it -- but something happened that changed the dynamic of that night."

Barkley recognized his take is "probably not a popular opinion among most people," but said the evidence pointed to an acquittal.

"I just feel bad because I don't like when race gets out in the media 'cuz I don't think the media has a 'pure heart,' as I call it," Barkley continued. "There are very few people who have a pure heart when it comes to race. Racism is wrong in any shape [or] form -- there are a lot of black people who are racist, too. I think sometimes when people talk about race, they act like only white people are racist. There are a lot of black people who are racist. And I don't like when it gets out there in the media because I don't think the media has clean hands."

Barkley, originally of Alabama, was named one of the NBA's all-time 50 greatest players in 1993, the same year he won the league's Most Valuable Player award. The 11-time All-Star retired after the 1999-2000 season and then began a successful career as a basketball analyst for Turner Network Television. He has also flirted with the idea of entering politics, announcing in 2008 that he intended to run for governor of Alabama before later changing his mind.

"Like I said, I feel sorry that young kid got killed, but just judging by the evidence, I don't think that guy should've went to jail for the rest of his life," Barkley continued. "Mr. Zimmerman was wrong to pursue, he was racial profiling, but I think Trayvon Martin -- God rest his soul -- I think he did flip the switch and started beating the hell out of Mr. Zimmerman. But it was just a bad situation."

Barkley then took aim at unnamed media personalities who allegedly allowed their own biases to show throughout coverage of the murder trial.

"The main thing I feel bad for is it gives every white person and black person who's racist a platform to vent their ignorance," he said. "That's the thing that bothered me the most. I watched this trail closely and I watched these people on television talking about it. A lot of these people have a hidden agenda. They want to have their racist views, whether they are white or black ... Their biases definitely come out. It was a bad situation. We all lost."

Partially Right, Partially Wrong... But Maybe it's a Start

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

(CNN) - Sen. John McCain, who lost in 2008 to the first African-American elected to the White House, said President Barack Obama's speech about race relations was "very impressive" and agreed that "stand your ground" laws should be re-examined, including those in his own state of Arizona.

"The 'stand your ground' law may be something that may needs to be reviewed by the Florida legislature or any other legislature that has passed such legislation," McCain said on CNN's "State of the Union."

Arizona is one of 30 states that have such laws, which give individuals certain legal rights in cases of self-defense. The law in Florida has come under scrutiny recently during the trial of George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer who shot and killed teenager Trayvon Martin last year during a confrontation.

Asked if he thinks Arizona should review the law, McCain said: "Yes, I do."

"And I'm confident that the members of the Arizona legislature will, because it is very controversial legislation," he told CNN chief political correspondent Candy Crowley.

McCain said he didn't agree with fellow Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, who argued Friday the Obama administration is calling for a review of "stand your ground" laws as a way to further its agenda against Second Amendment rights.

"Isn't it time for America to come together?" McCain asked. "I'd rather have a message of coming together and discussing these issues rather than condemning.

"I respect (Cruz's) view, but I don't frankly see the connection," he added. {Read More}

Senator John McCain is both right and wrong.

In regard the first issue he is right in acknowledging the need to maintain an open and active mind in an honest dialogue over race relations. This implies (and he said as much) the nation as a whole has a ways to go in embracing racial and cultural diversity.

To the degree the President's press conference earlier in the week stated these sentiments he was spot on and can be considered as a Presidential attempt to facilitate such discussion. It was when he made the decision to play the race card (we all know when that was) that e lost the high ground. And, so it was with the Senator when he choose to pander to race rather than stick to the rational facts and give the President a pass in playing the race card.

With respect to the second issue, "Stand Your Ground" legislation, the Senator is 100% correct. These laws MUST be revisited and either scrapped or preferably rewritten with clear and definitive language with respect to when the use of deadly force is considered justified under the law. In addition, comprehensive gun safety and stand your ground training should be mandatory, at the individuals expense, and retraining and certification should be mandatory every two years to retain your license to carry.

Being the realist (and cynic) that I am I have absolutely zero doubt but what NEITHERthe left loonies or the right loonies will find much of the above acceptable. I mean, it is all about ideology, party loyalty, and gunning (pardon the violent expression, it is only rhetorical liberals) to be the winner take all. Even when it makes NO rational sense to do so.

Via: Memeorandum

Race Baiting at the Highest Level of the Federal Government...?

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

I listened to the full Presidential news conference this afternoon. Obama said some things that made sense. Then he made the following remarks that IMNHO told the nation in full agenda with respect to said issue. Having a in depth discussion of race relations might very well be appropriate and a general discussion is something that MOST American's would welcome. Using the Zimmerman verdict ks simply the WRONG event at possibly the right time.

However, don't expect the President, the Department of Justice, or the liberal media or ultra liberal populace to understand what this means. If I can find a video of the full and complete news conference it will be posted later.




Via: Memeorandum 


 Update: via You Tube. 

 

Your views and thoughts are most welcome. Left and or Right leaning...

Emotionalism From the Left Having Desired Effect...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs-Tyranny

LA Times - At least six people were arrested Thursday night in San Bernardino after rocks and bottles were thrown and officers and pedestrians were attacked in a protest against the George Zimmerman trial verdict.

The incident began about 8 p.m. as marchers moved south along Highland Avenue and were joined by others not initially involved with what was a peaceful protest at that point, according to police.

Protesters ended up at a Jack in the Box restaurant near Waterman Avenue and Baseline Street and began hurling rocks and bottles at passing vehicles and officers who arrived at the scene, said Lt. Mike Madden of the San Bernardino Police Department.

"They just saw the opportunity for civil unrest," Madden told the Los Angeles Times.

Officers gave orders to disperse. At that point, groups of people took off running and began attacking and robbing pedestrians, according to police.

Two of the six people arrested were taken into custody on suspicion of strong-arm robbery, Madden said.

Police late Thursday were still monitoring roving groups of people in the streets. {}

Not doubt the left is proud?

Via: Memeorandum

The Attorney General Remarks to the NAACP... Meant to Telegraph the Next Chapter?

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

The Attorney General telegraphing what the ultimate decision by the Justice Department is to be?



Thinly veiled code words for racism throughout the "esteemed" Attorney General's remarks.

The Text - The death of 17-year-old African-American Trayvon Martin, and the subsequent trial of the man who shot him, George Zimmerman, brought back some sore memories for the U.S. attorney general.

"They brought me back to a number of experiences I had as a young man," Attorney General Eric Holder told the NAACP at their annual convention in Orlando Tuesday. "When I was pulled over twice and my car searched on the New Jersey Turnpike when I'm sure I wasn't speeding, or when I was stopped by a police officer while simply running to a catch a movie, at night in Georgetown, in Washington, D.C."

The shooting, meanwhile, inspired personal comments from President Obama as well. "You know, if I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon," the president said last year. {Read More}

UPDATE: via WESH

SANFORD, Fla. —A hold was placed Thursday on all evidence related to the death of Trayvon Martin.

It's another indication that federal investigators are not done with the George Zimmerman case, despite a jury's not guilty verdict.

Department of Justice investigators are looking into whether Zimmerman violated Martin's civil right.

Martin was shot to death in the Sanford townhouse complex where his father lived. Zimmerman, a volunteer neighborhood watchman, said the shooting was self defense. A jury found Zimmerman not guilty of second-degree murder.

Among the evidence is Zimmerman's handgun. Defense attorney Mark O'Mara said he thinks it would be best for the gun to be destroyed.

All of the evidence is now being held by the Sanford Police Department.

O'Mara said the investigation has been ongoing and that no evidence Zimmerman of racial bias has been found.

Meanwhile, O'Mara said he is mulling his own federal case against prosecutors. He said they withheld information that was important to the trial.

Video can be found here.

Via: Memeorandum

On the Zimmerman Trial amd Outcome...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Now that the second degree murder trial of George Zimmerman is over, with the jury's proper verdict of "not guilty", the nation begins the process of sorting out what it all means. As well as how the nation should move forward, if it moves at all.

View the following CNN video with Van Jones and Newt Gingrich... then, you be the judge. If reading body language helps pay close attention, it might aid you in making up your mind.



Now, some takes from your's truly...

This case is not about race. It is about a very stupid individual that acted stupidly in ignoring the police dispatcher's instructions on that fateful night.

The DA, as well as the prosecuting team botched both the indictment and the prosecution of the indictment. Place the responsibility where it belongs rather than screaming racism.

Bottom line, Zimmerman walked because an inept DA AMD prosecutors. It was not a case of second degree murder. Manslaughter or negligent homicide yes. And, that is how the state should have prosecuted the case.

Take 2 - The claim of racism has become so commonplace it clouds the ability to look beyond to find the truth.

Take 3 - I'm getting the feeling this whole affair might just have been planed.

1) DA brings wrong charges...
2) Prosecution could not make the case to get a conviction(intentionally?)...

3)In jumps DoD where it left off...
4) Federal civil rights violations charged...
5) Family brings wrongful death suit...

A repeat of the OJ fiasco... and both Holder and the President get some positive publicity.

Just sayin...

Really, Zimmerman should be made to pay some price for his abject stupidity (which by the way in and of itself is not a crime) that resulted in the untimely and unnecessary death of an innocent young man (not a child).

I'm not an attorney or a judge but I think 12 to 20 might be reasonable.

Stand your ground works when you have NO other alternative. Zimmerman had alternatives he CHOSE not to take.

Take 4 - Parents of any young man (or children as well given the drive by shootings and all in neighborhoods) should be concerned that things like this happen.

This is an issue of individual lack of judgement in Zimmerman's case as well as a systemic (cultural) issue.

If reason can prevail (on both sides) there is a chance the systemic (cultural) issues can be resolved.

The individual lack of judgement and respect for the rights of others will always exist. It is how we deal with these that determines who we are as a people.

Calm, following a storm almost always leads to the most appropriate implementation of safeguards.

There you have it. The takes by Van Jones, Newt Gingrich, and your's truly. What is important is your take.

What say you?

Via: Memeorandum

The Abortion Debate, Driven by Emotion on Both Sides of the Issue...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Debate over a women's reproductive rights, or put another way the right of a woman to select abortion continues. This nation, as a result of the SCOTUS 1973 decision legalizing abortion took the back alley abortion practice that was all to common before 1973 off the table. This was certainly a humane positive move forward.

Yet here we are today in the month of July 2013 even more polarized and irrationally inclined than perhaps we were in 1973.

Any reasonable and rational individual recognizes that abortion, certainly for the purpose of this discussion, means to terminate a developing fetus and thus the potential for human life. These same reasonable and rational individuals also realize that prior to a certain point in gestation the developing fetus is incapable of surviving outside the womb of the host female uterus, even with life support systems to keep it alive. Up until this point in gestation, typically accepted to be at or very near the 20th week (or 4.6 months), it seems reasonable for a women to have a free unfettered right to select an abortion.

It should be clear as well that for every rule, or piece of legislation, there must be provisions that recognize exceptions to the norm. Women who have late term pregnancy issue that threaten their life, the situation in which a women does not become aware of her pregnancy until after the 20 week benchmark (I know for a fact this happens because I have acquaintances and friends that this has happened to) are two examples that must protected in any legislation to be reasonable.

Further, the introducing invasive and unnecessary procedures for women selecting abortion is both unreasonable as well as dehumanizing. It is something any reasonable person should stand against. Just as unreasonable is the underhanded attempt to shut down clinics that provide reproductive counseling and abortions services during the 20 week threshold through legislation under the guise of insuring women's health. It is dishonest and wrong.

My byline states that both sides are driven by emotion and often allow passions to override reason. Until such time as both sides of the debate decide to come together and craft a rational and reasonable compromise that protects the right of a women to an abortion within certain "normal" parameters", as well well as recognizing there are reasonable exceptions that need to be recognized and written into legislation this debate will continue forever.

As unreasonable as the right can be, often the left can be as, or even worse. The following from a emotional unhinged leftist.

RN USA - "it totally escapes me why both extremes in this emotionally overheated debate prefer to talk (read scream) at each other rather than using reason to calmly work through the issues and arrive at a reasonable and workable compromise that works for the majority of women."

It totally escapes you because you have no fucking idea what it's like to be a woman, pregnant or barren. If you had some legislators in your state push through a law that said you had to have an invasive procedure (say a catheter up your penis) before you could HAVE a vasectomy, maybe then you'd have some notion of what it's like to be a woman who has a pregnancy that she wants to terminate--for any reason whatsoever. Maybe when they start throwing men who father children, then abadon them, in jail until their child is of legal age; when they start castratibg rapists, in public; when they start putting a telescope up the ass of every RWAMRA fuckwad that works to pass such laws as the one proposed in Texas, then MAYBE, I think those pieces-of-shit care about beings instead of scoring politica points. Fuck them.

Grow a uterus, get pregnant, have issues with your pregnancy--THEN you get to decide what's right for women re: controlling what goes on in their own bodies.

and continuing with this...

Irrational Nation-of-one-pants-wetting-liebertardlican:

You don't fucking get it, do you?

You DON'T have a vagina. You CAN'T get pregnant.

What you can do and have demonstrated in every comment on this subject is think that your amorphous and arbitrary definition (or anyone else's) of what a human is, is what should define a woman's right, under U.S. law, to control her own body. What is, moron? it is your FUCKING OPINION; it's not the definition of "human" under U.S. federal law, douchebag. Nor is abortion considered "murder" anywhere in this country--although idiots like you would be happy to see it defined as such.

The preceding diatribe personifies the extreme totally irrational and uncompromising left. The above comment was made on a respectable leftist blog whose administrators both apologized and handled the situation with integrity.

Make no mistake however there are those on the far right that are just as uncompromising and irrational as the lefty in question. An example of this can be found here.

Perhaps one day reason and commonsense will prevail. I for one am not holding my breath.

My apology for posting the rude and crude language that seems to be prevalent among the rabid left wing in America. I just thought you all should know in the event there was any doubt.

Via: Memeorandum

Immigration and a Need for Rational Compromise...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

America must indeed do something to overcome the HUGE immigration problem created over the past thirty three plus years. A problem that everyone (in both parties) one knew was developing and yet no one in either party had any real interest in addressing. So... here we are. Faced with HUGE problem that won;'t go away by itself and will requires some level of rational thinking on the part of both the democrats as well as republicans.

Speaker John Boehner may not get it right often, however, when he stated... “we’d be in a much weaker position if we didn’t act" with respect to immigration reform he was EXACTLY right.

THE HILL - Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) urged their House Republican colleagues to pass immigration reform legislation in a closed-door meeting Wednesday, with the Speaker arguing his conference would be “in a much weaker position” if it failed to act.

A divided House Republican conference met for more than two hours in the basement of the Capitol to begin hashing out a response to the sweeping immigration bill the Senate passed last month.

Boehner spoke at the outset of the meeting and reiterated his pledge that no immigration bill, including a final House-Senate conference report, would come to the floor without the support of a majority of the House GOP. But both he and Ryan, the House budget chief and the GOP’s vice presidential nominee in 2012, made the case that the House GOP should take action on immigration in a way that reflected the party’s principles, Republicans in the room said.

Boehner “said we’d be in a much weaker position if we didn’t act,” according to Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.). “He clearly wants to act, thinks something needs to get done. Frankly, our principles are probably closer to where the American people are, but it’s incumbent upon us to act.”

The party leadership did not lay out a timetable for floor votes in the meeting, though members indicated leaders could develop a timeline in the coming weeks.

Members said it was likely that the House would wait until after the August congressional recess to act, although votes on individual border security and interior enforcement bills that have passed out of committee were possible before then.

Following the meeting, Ryan said he was optimistic the House would act.

“I think our members are ready to tackle this issue. It needs to be fixed,” he told reporters. “There is an emerging consensus that our immigration system is broken, that we need to fix it, and we need to do it in a very thorough way.

“I feel very good. I feel we are in very good position to do it the right way. We don't want to rush anything,” he said before diving into a crowded elevator.

But opponents of any legislation providing a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants said there was no consensus on immigration's most controversial issue.

“There is little consensus in there for doing anything other than border security," said Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.). {Read More}

At this point I refer you to the preceding post...

Via: Memeorandum

The Seach for Sanity in America's Overheated Political Hyperbole and Denial of Reason...

by:Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

For those on the left side of the aisle, and  those on the right side of the aisle who are REALLY about getting something of substance accomplished the following will be REQUIRED..

Any questions?

Via: Reason

Only in the Minds of the Non Thinking... Democrats

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Apparently some democrats and progressives consider putting a National Park on the Moon, at what cost only Zeus knows, is money money well spent.

THE HILL - Two House Democrats have proposed legislation that would establish a national historical park on the surface of the moon to mark where the Apollo missions landed between 1969 and 1972.

The bill from Reps. Donna Edwards (D-Md.) and Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas) would create the Apollo Lunar Landing Sites National Historical Park. The park would be comprised of all artifacts left on the surface of the moon from the Apollo 11 through 17 missions.

The bill says these sites need to be protected because of the anticipated increase in commercial moon landings in the future.

"As commercial enterprises and foreign nations acquire the ability to land on the Moon, it is necessary to protect the Apollo lunar landing sites for posterity," according to the text of the Apollo Lunar Landing Legacy Act, H.R. 2617.

Under the legislation, the park would be established no later than one year after the bill passes and would be run jointly by the Department of the Interior and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). {Read More}

Via: Memeorandum

America's Creeping Surveilance...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Following 911, and the understandable fear it created in the hearts and minds of Americans, our federal government took steps to insure the security of the nation's citizenry and prevent possible future terrorist attacks. Beginning with the enactment of the Patriot Act the United States of America, in the pursuit of enhanced put into motion the legal mechanisms that can just as assuredly be used against the liberty of individuals as it can be used to provide national society ad thwarting terrorist attacks.

Certainly the argument for grossly expanded federal power in the name of protecting the American people is a powerful one, one few people took issue with following the Islamist attack on the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. From the initial enactment of the Patriot Act federal agencies like TSA, NSA, and the FISA court have grown ever more intrusive of the rights of innocent and law abiding citizens. This is, or should be considered a most frightening trend. As government becomes more intrusive and secretive the possibility, indeed the likelihood the government will use data in liberty sapping ways is increased significantly. The inevitable result will most certainly be an erosion of liberty and a more entrenched and powerful federal government.

GWB is synonymous with the Patriot Act and setting in motion greater expansion of government power. GHO has continued to oversee these expanded powers and the continued enlargement of them.

The New York Times (WASHINGTON) - WASHINGTON — In more than a dozen classified rulings, the nation’s surveillance court has created a secret body of law giving the National Security Agency the power to amass vast collections of data on Americans while pursuing not only terrorism suspects, but also people possibly involved in nuclear proliferation, espionage and cyberattacks, officials say.

The rulings, some nearly 100 pages long, reveal that the court has taken on a much more expansive role by regularly assessing broad constitutional questions and establishing important judicial precedents, with almost no public scrutiny, according to current and former officials familiar with the court’s classified decisions.

The 11-member Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as the FISA court, was once mostly focused on approving case-by-case wiretapping orders. But since major changes in legislation and greater judicial oversight of intelligence operations were instituted six years ago, it has quietly become almost a parallel Supreme Court, serving as the ultimate arbiter on surveillance issues and delivering opinions that will most likely shape intelligence practices for years to come, the officials said.

Last month, a former National Security Agency contractor, Edward J. Snowden, leaked a classified order from the FISA court, which authorized the collection of all phone-tracing data from Verizon business customers. But the court’s still-secret decisions go far beyond any single surveillance order, the officials said.

“We’ve seen a growing body of law from the court,” a former intelligence official said. “What you have is a common law that develops where the court is issuing orders involving particular types of surveillance, particular types of targets.”

In one of the court’s most important decisions, the judges have expanded the use in terrorism cases of a legal principle known as the “special needs” doctrine and carved out an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s requirement of a warrant for searches and seizures, the officials said. {Full Article Here}

A very wise man once said, and it still holds true today... "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. And, there is most definitely unintended consequences. Even when the initial actions were intended for good.

Via: Memeorandum

Texas Tea and Things Imagined...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Having tired of the religious right's fanaticism and the rabid left's fanaticism, while arguing for reasonable and reasoned positions for reproductive rights for women and at the same time arguing to recognize the right of a viable fetus to continue life, it is clear to me this debate will continue into the next century and possibly beyond.

So, this being my last post on the issue I leave you with the insanity.

Just minutes after a House panel Wednesday passed a package of sweeping abortion restrictions, Reps. Donna Howard, a Democrat, and Steve Toth and Bill Zedler, both Republicans, got into an interesting and at times heated discussion. This happened right after several House Republicans held an impromptu presser in the back of the hearing room following an 8-3 partly line vote to pass House Bill 2. Howard, who joined Democratic colleagues in a presser of their own, was still hanging around the hearing room and jumped right into the scrum

If you would like to take the time to read the text you can find it here.

The last thing I'll say about this issue is: BOTH THE RABID LEFT and WING NUT RIGHT are WRONG.

Via: Memeorandum

More in Common Than You Might Think... ?

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Ex-President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama converse during this week's trip to Tanzania. (Doug Mills/The New York Times)

This should be interesting.

dallasnews -A president named Obama may be most linked to overhauling immigration policy. But on Wednesday, George W. Bush will weigh in.

Bush will deliver opening remarks at an citizenship ceremony and immigration forum at the Dallas presidential center bearing his name, where it’s expected he will talk about how immigration reform will be good for America. A panel discussion titled “What Immigrants Contribute” will follow. The day will start with 20 immigrants taking a quick pathway to citizenship at an actual naturalization ceremony.

It’s unclear whether the ex-president will stick to generalities during his remarks at the citizenship ceremony, or elevate the conversation with details about the super-sized immigration bill now being debated in Congress.

The George. W. Bush Institute has thrown some weight behind measures to overhaul immigration policies and linked it to its “4% Growth Project,” which proposes such growth would create 10 million additional jobs during the next decade with no rise in government spending. The event will include panels discussing immigration and economic growth, why naturalization matters and “how immigrants serve America.”

Bush’s own promised overhaul of immigration policy was defeated in Congress. His measure with its five basic points is even featured in the new presidential museum, which also houses the Bush Institute.

The Bush Institute has pushed a small stream of reports and posts advocating an overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws. Many are blunt: “How Conservatives Should Think About Immigration Reform.” Others note that the Bush Institute has backed “immigration reform” with a book co-sponsored with the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.

Last week, S 744 passed the Senate, but the real fighting on the overhaul will take place in the House. The Senate measure includes a controversial “border surge” amendment that would double the Border Patrol, supply drones and more fencing to the nation’s southern flank. It was viewed as an inducement to Republicans to rally their support for the Senate measure, but one that brought criticism from Mexico’s Foreign Minister and U.S. citizens living at the border.

Some Latino and immigrant-rights groups based in border states like Texas and California say they oppose a measure that includes increases in law enforcement they consider extreme. The Border Patrol has already doubled its size from about a decade ago. Among those voicing objections are the El Paso-based Border Network on Human Rights, the online group called Presente.org, and border affiliates of the ACLU.

Waiting with baited breath for next Wednesday.

Via: Memeorandum

What It Means To Be a Proud American... In Part

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Stirring words spoken by a man who happened to be the President of the United States of America who although elected twice to the highest office in the land by the American People would not even receive the nomination of his party were he running in 2016. A shame, but the stark truth. Those who really know and understand his record realize this truth.

A big h/t to the Left Coast Rebel blog.



Happy Independence Day!!!

Independence Day and a Very Timely Poll...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Today is Independence Day in the United States of America. A day in which ALL Americans should take pride, as well as being thankful for the liberties we enjoy as a people.

 Governed by the rule of law, free from the religious tyranny of the dark ages as well as present day extreme Islam, and fundamentalist Christianity... We have our founding fathers and the Constitution they gave us to thank for this incredible, and increasingly rare reality.

A recent and timely GALLUP POLL sheds light on American citizens perspective and  Pride in the USA.

As the United States celebrates Independence Day, most of its adult residents continue to say they are proud to be an American, including 57% who are extremely proud and 28% who are very proud. This high level of pride in being an American has varied only moderately over the past 12 years since the question was first asked, but has been lower since 2005 than it was in the years prior.

The latest results are from a June 1-4 Gallup survey. An additional 10% say they are moderately proud to be an American, leaving 3% who say they are "only a little proud" and 1% who say they are "not at all proud."

There are few differences by age on this pride dimension, while those in the South are slightly more likely than those in the East and West to say they are proud. Conservatives and Republicans are also slightly more likely to say they are proud than are liberals and Democrats.

Americans Believe Signers of the Declaration Would Be Disappointed

Despite their widespread national pride, Americans evince a much more negative response when asked if the signers of the Declaration of Independence would be pleased or disappointed by the way the United States has turned out. Seventy-one percent of Americans say the signers would be disappointed, while 27% say they would be pleased.

Americans have become significantly less positive in response to this question, down from a high of 54% who said the signers would be pleased in 2001.

Older Americans, those living in the Midwest, conservatives, and Republicans are relatively less likely to say the signers would be pleased than their counterparts. Conservatives and Republicans also were less likely to say the signers would have been pleased in 2001 -- when George W. Bush was president -- but the partisan and ideological differences are larger today. This indicates that Republicans' and conservatives' growing disenchantment with a Democratic president could be one of the underlying factors in the decline in the percentage of Americans who say the signers would be pleased.

{Read More}

It seems Americans of all political affiliations and ideologies are PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN, with the very small minority of course that likely wouldn't be proud to be anything, except maybe an as*h**e. However, on this day set aside to celebrate our unique American experience, and the freedom of thought and liberty that has continued to this day,  let us postpone discussion of  that issue for another day. In the moment  ALL AMERICANS  should CELEBRATE our unique American identity as well as the spirit of freedom and liberty that has defined us for generations. Irrespective of political party. Let us stand against all (in the memory of our founding fathers) all who would shackle us. Whomever they may be.

Via: Memeorandum

Contemplating a Palin Presidency (or any religious right wing politician), Leftist Delusions or a Real Possibility?...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

I am sure many millions have contemplated what the United States of America might look like should Sarah Palin ever be elected president. I know I have. The following is an article that contemplates such a scenario. Although it is a fictional scenario it could conceivably happen. Contemplating beyond just a possible Palin presidency... Any religious right wing politician might very well change the United States of America along the lines discussed in the the article. Trashing the Constitution in the process.

Perhaps the best course for United States Citizens is to study the issues of the day, work to gain a better understanding of the Constitution and the rights it protects and guarantees, and improve knowledge of the workings of our government. Doing so would certainly result in making more informed voting decisions.

By PATRICK GAVIN - The McCain/Palin ticket lost in 2008, right? Fiction can change that.

”Christian Nation” is a new novel from lawyer Fred Rich that wonders what would happen if the Republican ticket won in 2008. But Rich goes even further than that, plotting a would-be Palin presidency after McCain passes away in the novel.

And although it’s fiction, Rich is dead serious about what a Palin presidency would mean for the country. As the title suggest, Rich is concerned about how religious extremists on the right could upend society.

“If somebody like Sarah Palin, who holds so firmly to this conviction that America is and should be a Christian nation, what would happen if she actually had the power to implement it?” Rich says his book “paints a picture of what that path would look like.”

“How could the federal courts, which are the only defense against all the nonsense you see out of the state legislatures, how could the federal court system be neutralized? What legislative strategies could the Christian right pursue were they in control of the Congress? It shows that it’s not impossible or unthinkable for them to actually be able to implement that agenda.”

What would happen, according to Rich and the book is a government that claims to speak for God and policies based solely on the Bible, which would overwhelming hurt gay Americans.

Rich says he used to be Roman Catholic, but now he’s an atheist. And he used to be a Republican, but now he’s an independent. And he says his book shouldn’t offend all Christians, just the extreme ones.

“This book is not intended to be a shrill, bombastic addition to this conversation. It’s intended to be a much more thoughtful piece of work. … 30 to 40 percent of fellow citizens self-identify as born again evangelical. It’s going to take a long time, if ever, for those demographics to change. And those aren’t bad people — I’m not hitting those people over the head. What I’m doing is shining a spotlight on the fact that some leading opinion makers — and the ones that can drive the politics in this country — are extremists. (Emphasis added)” {Read More}

Indeed extreme views seem to get the lions share of the headlines and permeate the press, blogs, and airways. This is truly unfortunate, and both the right as well as the left has their share of "extremists."

Via: Memeorandum

What Puts Some Over the Top?...

From the Desk Of:
Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Received this in the inbox at Rational Nation USA this afternoon. It certainly seems to apply to some executives and almost ALL politicians methinks.


A bit crude but entertaining . . . ENJOY!!!

*Mathematics:* This comes from 2 math teachers with a combined total of 70 yrs experience. It has an indisputable mathematical logic. It also made me laugh out loud. This is a strictly mathematical viewpoint. It goes like this:

What makes 100%?

What does it mean to give MORE than 100%?

Ever wonder about those people who say they are giving more than 100%? We have all been to those meetings where someone wants you to give over 100%.

How about achieving 103%?

What makes up 100% in life?

Here's a little mathematical formula that might help you answer these questions:

If: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Is represented as:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Then:

H-A-R-D-W-O-R-K
8+1+18+4+23+15
+18+11 = 98%

And…

K-N-O-W-L-E-D-G-E
11+14 +15+23+12
+5+4+7+5 = 96%

But…

*A-T-T-I-T-U-D-E
1+20+20+9+20+21
+4+5 = 100%*

And…

B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T
2+21+ 12+12+
19+8+9+20 =103%

And, look how far ass kissing will take you.

A-S-S-K-I-S-S-I-N-G
1+19+19+11+9+ 19+19+9+14+7 = 118%

So, one can conclude with mathematical certainty, that while “Hard-work” and
“Knowledge” will get you close, and “Attitude” will get you there.
It's the “Bullshit” and “Ass Kissing” that will put you over the top.

Now you know why some people are where they are!

Kirsten Powers Speaks Out, and Powerfully on Reasonable Abortion Law...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

Kirsten Powers is a woman of the left. Yet there has always been something about her that I knew set her apart from the pack. It's called COMMON SENSE Kirsten recently reaffirmed my belief in her ability to reason clearly.

THE DAILY BEAST - It’s amazing what is considered heroism these days.

A Texas legislator and her pink sneakers have been lionized for an eleventh-hour filibuster against a bill that would have made it illegal for mothers to abort babies past 20 weeks of pregnancy, except in the case of severe fetal abnormalities or to protect the life or health of the mother.

But the fight is not over. The bill will be reintroduced, and supporters of the ban are optimistic it will pass. For now, Wendy Davis has achieved the dubious victory of maintaining a very dark status quo. Texas women will still be able to abort a healthy baby up to the 26th week of pregnancy for any reason, as the current law allows.

According to the Parents Connect website, if you are in the 25th week of your pregnancy, “Get ready for pat-a-cake! Baby’s hands are now fully developed and he spends most of his awake time groping around in the darkness of your uterus. Brain and nerve endings are developed enough now so that your baby can feel the sensation of touch.” Let’s be clear: Davis has been called a hero for trying to block a bill that would make aborting this baby illegal.

In addition to the limit on late-term abortions, the Texas legislature sought to pass regulations on abortion clinics similar to what was passed in Pennsylvania in 2011 after the Gosnell horror. The New York Times warned that the Texas bill “could lead to the closing of most of Texas’s 42 abortion clinics.” That sounds familiar. In 2011, the Pennsylvania ACLU claimed a post-Gosnell bill “would effectively close most and maybe all of the independent abortion clinics in Pennsylvania.” Last month, a Pennsylvania news site reported that “several” abortion clinics have closed, which isn’t quite the Armageddon the abortion-rights movement predicted.

So no, I don’t stand with Wendy. Nor do most women, as it turns out. According to a June National Journal poll, 50 percent of women support, and 43 percent oppose, a ban on abortion after 20 weeks, except in cases of rape and incest.

One can assume I am also not the only woman in America who is really tiring of the Wendys of the world claiming to represent “women’s rights” in their quest to mainstream a medical procedure—elective late-term abortion—that most of the civilized world finds barbaric and abhorrent. {Read More}

Kirsten Powers is a liberal democrat on the right side of the abortion debate. She, like the majority of American women understand the issues clearly. With women like Kirsten speaking out is there any doubt but what reason and common sense will ultimately prevail?

Kirsten, you go girl...

Some Interesting Info... Not Surprising

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

America is indeed changing. More accepting and tolerant. For certain the nation has a long way to go before bigotry and prejudice is finally eradicated for good. But the movement is encouraging and no amount of religious right influence or  latent racial prejudice will stop the trajectory.

Some interesting snippets of the changing times.

USA TODAY -...  Last year was the first time a majority of Americans had backed gay marriage.

The only major demographic groups in which a majority oppose same-sex marriage are Republicans (68%) and seniors 65 and older (51%). Even in the South, which continues to be the only region that doesn't show majority support for gay marriage, opposition has slipped below 50%.

• By a narrower margin, 48%-43%, those surveyed favor the Supreme Court's decision declaring unconstitutional part of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which barred the federal government from providing benefits to same-sex spouses. Views on the issue are intense. Those who feel strongly about the issue split 29%-29% in favor and against the ruling.

• By 53%-37%, Americans say affirmative action programs are still needed to counteract the effects of discrimination against minorities. That reflects a rebound in support after the court's ruling. In an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll taken a few weeks before the court's decision, the nation split 45%-45% over whether such programs were needed or had gone too far.

In a case involving the University of Texas, the Supreme Court ruled that affirmative action programs in college admissions were permissible but set a tough legal standard the programs have to meet.

• By 49%-40%, those surveyed oppose the decision by the court to strike down the provision in the Voting Rights Act that required some states, mostly in the South, to get federal approval to change election laws. Two-thirds of African Americans oppose the decision.

The country divides 43%-44% in approval-disapproval over the way the Supreme Court is doing its job. That's the lowest level of approval in eight years and nearly 20 percentage points lower than it was as recently as 2001...  {Full Report Here}

The only thing that is inevitable is change.  Best to accept change and work to make things better. Without giving up the many good things that have always been America. 

Via: Memeorandum

As We Keep Doing the Same Things and Expecting Different Results...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny

This individual has enjoyed his four plus years spent political blogging. It has been my pleasure to encounter some very intelligent individuals from the conservative libertarian side as well as from the liberal progressive side. Of course the downside has been there are are in fact some really dumb individuals on both sides. Individuals that lack the ability as well as the desire to even consider that there may be a different and possibly better way of looking at and approaching issues. I'm sure you all know somebody like that.

For me the journey has been informative and instructional. All of us develop our values, principles, and aspirations based in large share on our early life experience. For those with active and inquiring minds I'm fairy certain you understand. For those who prefer the known and avoid the temporary mind chaos of considering and sorting out new ideas and concepts, well turn in to Fox News or MSNBC.

After 61 years of a rather eventful (and stressful) life it simply astounds me that given all the changes in technology, the increased knowledge we have gained (especially in science), and the opportunities for economic growth and expansion that we have remained relatively stuck in the status qua. I suppose that is because humans my their nature prefer the known over the unknown.

So, we keep clinging to the data points we learned as children and young adults. Believing that doing so preserves our comfort zone and thereby our emotional and mental security. This phenomenon is not specific to just conservatives, it in fact extends to liberals. Regardless of political ideology, proclivities, or indoctrination people being people respond to what they know positively. Being open to different concepts and possible ways of doing things is, well, frightening for many. Perhaps most.

It has been said that the definition of insanity is to repeatedly do the same thing over and over again and expect different results.

America has sadly arrived at that low point.

To crib Forest Gump... " And that's all I have to say about that."