Only Democrats Get Accident Forgiveness

Again, here we are with our latest freedom of speech issue which is inevitably lost in heated debate of race, culture and skin color further tangled by the unwritten yet very powerful law of political correctness which must be adhered to. That is of course, if you do not fall within the protected class of race or belong to the Democratic Party. The hypocrisy is as obvious as it is endless yet the Democratic Party members never suffer the consequences of violating their own guiding morals which is firmly rooted in the Marxist ideology from which political correctness was born. Moral standards of truth and principle take the backseat of political convenience whenever their own double standard is brought to the center stage by the violation of offense towards members of minorities when their own exercising of freedom of speech is in direct conflict with the sacred code of conduct political correctness demands. The rules are made as the game is played and the Democrat party referees all games. They are their own merciful Judges who consistently show no mercy to those who belong to an opposing Party violate offensive speech towards any minority member regardless of whether the truth is spoken or not. Senator Harry (The Hypocrite) Reid has become the latest perfect example of this tiresome double standard we regular Americans must live by or otherwise face immediate character assassination and loss of employment and income as a result of a candid opinion. In this instance, I stand above all else in support of our freedom of speech which is guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. What Harry Reid said was certainly a poor choice of words to describe his approval of then Senator Barrack Obama. This no doubt caused offense to the African American community from which he would risk being held accountable for his opinion by the African Americans who belong in his constituency. But what he said was no crime and certainly should not be required by those outside of his district to lose his elected position over his right to freely express his opinion. Our constitution does not restrict ones choice to offend another even when the offensive words spoken are not beneficial to others or even to the speaker. Senator Harry Reid has the right to his own free will to form an opinion of others and express that opinion. That is why freedom of speech was included in our Bill of Rights. Otherwise we allow the government or other authorities to police our very own thoughts by their choice of virtue and standard. This is the paradox of those who feel they believe they possess the authority and right to dictate what others are allowed to believe or express through speech based on their self imposed principles. In this blunder Senator Harry Reid finds himself caught in the very web he has cast for his own prey. In the normal realm of regular people the biblical principles of reaping what has been sowed would naturally be the standard of consequence, but not if yet again you belong to and rule as a member of the Democratic Party and practice its mandated religion of political correctness. In this case it becomes similar to the All-State insurance commercials we all see on TV. Accident Forgiveness is their exclusive insurance policy. This is a benefit available only to the members of the club. We all know what the fate of a non-democratic political figure would otherwise be if they’re speech violated political correctness or was offensive to a protected class member. So the apologists play their word games to defend the senator when previously they played a role in the witch hunt against a political foe. In the end this argument will only result in further damage to race relations as the hypocrisy of the Democratic Party continues unabated.

What if American’s Voted With Their Spiritual Conscience?

In my last post I tried to explain what history has taught us about leaders of nations who twist their religion or belief system to fit their own political agenda or personal power trip in order to enslave the people under the guise of religious belief. I also outlined the dangers therein of the need of separation of church and state, and how the new America cast off the shackles of state sponsored or mandated religion, and sought to allow the individual to worship God as their conscience or spirit self led them without threat of persecution from their government.

Over the last several decades we have had the notion that politics and religion must be kept separate beat against our brow so much that we missed the point and deliberate meaning of the phrase, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. The meaning of the phrase only meant that the government could not require its citizen’s to believe and worship in a religion that the government chose for the citizen’s to follow and require them to practice it under threat.

If you have ever visited Washington, D.C., our nation’s capital, you would be hard pressed not to see so many references to the God of Christianity, scriptures from the Bible, and quotations of bold faith from founding fathers in which have been written in historical documents, carved beautifully in stone of Statues and the walls of magnificent buildings of historical purpose. It is absolutely everywhere enshrined in the fabulous and timeless architecture of our past.

The ludicrous notion that our country was not founded on the bedrock of Christian principles just will not hold water. There is no doubt of it even if you ignored the tremendous amount of recorded memoirs and journals of those who established this nation.

The thought has caused me to wonder what would happen if American’s voted according to their personal religious beliefs? Would their votes on the issue’s stand contrary to what their own personal faith would require? Would their votes on the issues be in line with the scriptures of their belief? Would American’s even cast a vote to elect a politician that does not believe the way they do?

Why?

I always hear people who are suppose to be Christians try to make the flimsy excuse of separation of church and state when they try to defend being in favor as such issues as abortion, homosexuality, etc. etc. etc. It seems to me that a person’s moral and spiritual guidance would lead him to oppose supporting such legislative proposals when it comes in conflict with their own personal belief system.

It also seems to me that people pick and choose what they will support and quickly brush aside or compromise their very own beliefs in order to progress a candidate or issue.

What would this country be like today if people backed up their belief in God, the teachings of the Bible, the teachings of Christ?

Would our children be able to learn about creation in their class rooms? Would they be able to pray to the one and only real God? If God had not been kicked out of schools would there be as much violence and death in them today?  Would our prisons be as overcrowded? Would our streets be any safer? Would families be any stronger?

Should people continue to keep God out of our decisions while choosing which side of a moral issue we are on and which candidate we should support?

America Needs Sarah Palin For President

Political correctness has destroyed both the Democrat and Republican parties. It has placed diversity above common sense in almost every aspect of American life. The middle class is no longer effectively represented by its politicians elected to serve them because they are unable to argue the concerns and wishes of their constituents out of fear of character assassination from the politically correct left. This has happened so often not only in political arenas but also in the private sector to the point that our Representatives are to cowardly to speak their mind. We do have the right to free speech in this country for the time being, but we are quickly losing it by the cowardly actions of those who consider themselves to important to risk their political futures for the sake of our freedom of speech and right to government decent. Yes, our politicians on both sides of the isle have sold us out for their time in the spotlight of politics. They are cowards that refuse to make a stand for what so many have died for in order for us to keep the rights of free speech. That freedom is exactly what made this country so great, the freedom that ideals could be debated in the best interest of we the people! Let us remember the fact that your average Joe is very unlikely to hold the office of a representative without possession of large amounts of personal wealth or fame. The corruption of political campaign contributions has eliminated the odds of your average citizen reaching such levels of government leadership. So what we are stuck with to represent us is rich politicians who are limited with their effectiveness by their race, religion, gender, political viewpoints and above all else their personal fortunes. What we need as president in my opinion is a conservative woman. Women are far less intimidated about speaking what they feel is the truth or saying what they feel is right for our country. Yes, they are heavily targeted by the far left politically correct crowd but they do a far better job of ignoring it and pushing through regardless. That is exactly what we need. The conservatives in this country far out number all the rest but are unable to have someone with backbone that will stand up to the plate and hit the hardballs thrown at them from the left. We need a woman who has risen from the grass roots of middle class America and possesses true American values. One who is unafraid or unashamed to claim Christianity and promote family values. I believe at this point in time that Sarah Palin is the only one who fits all these attributes and fits them well. I have no doubts that Sarah Palin has the personal strength and intellect that is required to hold the office of president and without a doubt she is competent to handle the position. Sarah Palin speaks with authority and is unafraid of the personal attacks that are still heaped on her even today. I believe it is time we give her a chance to show her true strength which she was unable to show as a vice presidential candidate. I believe it is past time that we elect someone willing to restore our freedom of speech to its original constitutional strength.