Thursday, June 7, 2018

Personification Is Not An Excuse

by Beth Alcazar (June 05, 2018)
Personification is an effective literary tool used as a method for describing something. It is a technique by which human characteristics, qualities or emotions are attributed to something that is not human — or even alive. Personification can add interest to a poem, presentation, advertisement or story. It’s fun to read. It can bring life and understanding to the subject at hand. For example, have you ever heard someone say, “Traffic slowed to a crawl,” or, “The stars winked in the night sky?” We know that cars are not literally crawling around the asphalt like infants. We also understand that big balls of gas in space are not human, and they do not have eyes, so they cannot wink. But we also comprehend what is meant by both statements: Traffic was really bad, and the starlight twinkled.

With that, I would argue that most people know that an inanimate object does not really have feelings, needs, desires or the ability to do human things. We get it. So that is one reason it bothers me so much that people are allowing — and falling for — the personification of firearms.
Consider the gun owner who destroyed his AR-15 in a viral video after the atrocious incident at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. He stated, “I can’t live knowing that my gun’s out there, and it can one day possibly commit a horrific act like the other day in Florida.”
See the problem?
We know that guns do not kill people. While they can certainly be used by human beings for malicious intentions, guns are not alive. They cannot commit crimes. They do not have emotions. They do not get angry. They cannot make decisions. Guns do not choose to wound or kill. They cannot move on their own. They do not have the ability to get up and go.
Guns are things — inanimate objects — and yet, guns are constantly blamed for injuries. Guns are blamed for deaths. Guns are blamed for mass shootings. This blaming is an egregious error because personifying firearms takes away attention from the person or people who actually committed the crime. It takes away the responsibility of the criminals who use guns to hurt or kill others. It takes away the accountability from the human beings at fault. And instead of people seeing these bad guys and wanting to bring them to justice, people are seeing the guns and wanting them either destroyed or taken away. And sadly, that’s not the problem. And it’s certainly not the solution.
Personification is a poetic technique; it is not an excuse for terrible people to do terrible things with guns.

 Comments are invited!
Send feedback to:  WatchDog

Wednesday, May 9, 2018

Thursday, April 26, 2018

The NRA Vilain Or Not?

None of its 5 million plus members has ever been involved in a mass-shooting; however the NRA is being accused of being responsible for mass-school shootings.
Some fanatics are even calling them a ‘terrorist’ organization.  
Let’s examine the ‘evil’ things that the NRA has done:
1.       The NRA actually wrote the “National Instant Criminal Background Check” (NICS) bill for Congress.  Since then they have advocated for a stronger bill.
2.      Since passage of the bill, the NRA has pushed for better compliance by the states because only 12 states fully comply with reporting felons to be included on the NICS.  
3.      The NRA has encouraged that those mental patients that are adjudicated to be at risk, be included on the NICS.
4.      The NRA provides training programs for local, state, and federal police agencies.
5.      The NRA provides training programs for K thru 12 on firearm safety.
6.      The NRA is the governing body for firearm completion within the U.S.A.
7.      The NRA is the largest protector of the 2nd Amendment and therefore, the largest protector of the U.S. Constitution.
Congress uses the NRA as a scapegoat for their failure to enact firearm legislation.  The real reason that they can’t enact ‘effective’ firearm legislation is because there is nothing that can be enacted that would prevent any of the mass shootings.  Yes, the NRA does lobby Congress to insure just and effective legislation, but it does not contribute mast sums of money to individual campaigns.  The NRA’s main contribution to elections is the power of its endorsement.
Congress is reluctant to undertake the one thing that has been common to ALL of the mass-shootings in schools—mind altering drugs like Prozac.  Congress will have to be bold and address the HIPAA regulations before the mental health issues can be addressed by the background check.
As we all know the only thing Congress is bold about is blaming others for their lack of courage.
Oh yes, the NRA is an advocate for “Concealed Carry”!   They have a slogan, “Only a good man with a gun can stop a bad man with a gun”.
This would have been the case during the largest mass- school shooting in America that occurred at VPI (July 16, 2007).  Thirty-two were killed and 17 were wounded.  A number of student survivors who were concealed carry permit holders, stated that had they been permitted to ‘carry’ on campus, they could HAVE taken the shooter down.  The weapons used by the ‘insane’ shooter were a pair of 9 mm handguns.
For the record; at the present time, there are over 11 million concealed carry permit holders in the U.S.A., they have a better misuse of firearms record and that of the police.
In truth, concealed carry permit holders thwart crimes many times every day.  You don’t hear about these stories because they don’t fit the Medias anti-firearm agenda.
This writer fails to see anything that would indicate that the NRA has contributed in any way to mass-shootings.
 Certainly it is not a terrorist organization.

Comments are invited!
Send feedback to:  WatchDog


Friday, April 13, 2018

FACTS Not Reported By The 'FAKE' News!

The following information is not in dispute!
However, it is not being reported by our so called mainstream media.

And it was Trump that they investigated for collusion!

Comments are invited!
Send feedback to:  WatchDog

Saturday, April 7, 2018

What The 'Left' Promises If They Gain Control In The 2018 Elections

Several Democrat members of Congress have proudly stated their intentions, assuming that they are back in the majority after the upcoming November elections.

The following is a list of their ‘promises to date:

Impeach number 45 (Donald J. Trump)
Impeach number 46 (Mike Pence)
Repeal the Trump tax cuts.
Reinstate the Obamacare mandate.
Cut the military budget.
Ban of semiautomatic firearms.
Create a National firearm owner’s registry.
Reinstate the war on coal.
Fully fund Obamacare.
Open up immigration to all.
Protect Sanctuary cities.
Raise taxes. (They really didn’t have to tell us this one)
Prevent any form of voter identification. (A number of them have actually stated that “undocumented immigrants”, more accurately known as illegal aliens, should be allowed to vote.)

And at least two Democrats running for the House seats and one that is running for the Senate have called for the confiscation of all firearms.

There are certainly other items that they have promised that this blog is not yet aware of and you may rest assured that the list will grow as the election nears.

The truth is that the Progressives are not really concerned about Donald Trump the individual; they are trying to stage a coup by invalidating an election that did not go their way.  They do not believe in the ability or the right of the American people to govern themselves.

They are upset that their master plan that started more than fifty years ago was thwarted just as it was about to payoff.   Obama was to finish us off, but the Tea Party through a Monkey wrench in the works.  Then the Hillary coronation was to allow the naming of another non-constitutionalist judge to the SCOTUS. 

Another “Liberal” judge would have guaranteed nullification of the 2nd Amendment, probably finished off what is left of the protection of religion in the 1st Amendment, and end States Rights as defined in the Constitution.

Comments are invited!
Send feedback to:   WatchDog

Monday, April 2, 2018

Am I A Sexist?

According to Hillary Clinton, if I voted for someone other than her, I am a sexist.

A number of her friends have expressed similar views and a few have written books on the subject.

Let me explain my obvious sexist views:

1.      I believe in the U.S. Constitution.  That means that every Supreme Court, in fact, all Federal Court justices, should be strict constitutionalist.  Hillary stated on several occasions that she would not appoint any constitutionalist judges.  (Not what I want from any president)

2.      The Clintons went from being broke in January 2001 to having a net worth in excess of $220 million in 2013.  That’s an average gain of over $18,000,000/yr.  The only lottery that they won was named the ‘Clinton Foundation’ which brought in millions of dollars in return for political favors.  She and Bill are crooked!  (Not what I want from any president)

3.      Hillary promised to continue the same failed economic policies as Obama put in place.  (Not what I want from any president)

4.      Hillary said that she would continue a foreign policy in which she would lead from behind.  A   practice which resulted in Obama kissing a lot of asses, most notably that of Vladimir Putin.  (Not what I want from any president)

5.      Hillary supports the dangerously flawed Iranian Nuclear Treaty.  (Not what I want from any president)

6.      Hillary said that she would continue the Obama policy with respect to North Korea.  (Not what I want from any president)

7.      Hillary supports open borders. To her, illegal voters are more important than the terrorist, the MS-13 members, and the tons of illegal drugs pouring in from Mexico.  (Not what I want from any president)

There and at least another dozen items including her email scandals, the Benghazi failure and cover-up, and a rigged nomination, that kept this citizen from voting for Mrs. Clinton.

If bring a Patriot, or supporting the U.S. Constitution, or not wanting my country overrun by uninvited immigrants makes me a sexist, I will wear that title as a badge of honor. 

Comments are invited!
Send feedback to:  WatchDog

Monday, March 5, 2018

How Can Someone Who Lives In Insane Luxury Be A Star?

Ben Stein’s Last Column   (August 9, 2004)
How Can Someone Who Lives in Insane Luxury Be a Star in Today’s World?
As I begin to write this, I “slug” it, as we writers say, which means I put a heading on top of the document to identify it. This heading is “FINAL,” and it gives me a shiver to write it. I have been doing this column for so long that I cannot even recall when I started. I loved writing this column so much for so long I came to believe it would never end. It worked well for a long time, but gradually, my changing as a person and the world’s change have overtaken it.

On a small scale, Morton’s [famous restaurant which was often frequented by Hollywood stars], while better than ever, no longer attracts as many stars as it used to. It still brings in the rich people in droves and definitely some stars. I saw Samuel L. Jackson there a few days ago, and we had a nice visit, and right before that, I saw and had a splendid talk with Warren Beatty in an elevator, in which we agreed that Splendor in the Grass was a super movie. But Morton’s is not the star galaxy it once was, though it probably will be again.

Beyond that, a bigger change has happened. I no longer think Hollywood stars are terribly important. They are uniformly pleasant, friendly people, and they treat me better than I deserve to be treated. But a man or woman who makes a huge wage for memorizing lines and reciting them in front of a camera is no longer my idea of a shining star we should all look up to.

How can a man or woman who makes an eight-figure wage and lives in insane luxury really be a star in today’s world, if by a “star” we mean someone bright and powerful and attractive as a role model? Real stars are not riding around in the backs of limousines or in Porsches or getting trained in yoga or Pilates and eating only raw fruit while they have Vietnamese girls do their nails. They can be interesting, nice people, but they are not heroes to me any longer.

A real star is the soldier of the 4th Infantry Division who poked his head into a hole on a farm near Tikrit, Iraq. He could have been met by a bomb or a hail of AK-47 bullets. Instead, he faced an abject Saddam Hussein and the gratitude of all of the decent people of the world. A real star is the U.S. soldier who was sent to disarm a bomb next to a road north of Baghdad. He approached it, and the bomb went off and killed him.. A real star, the kind who haunts my memory night and day, is the U.S. soldier in Baghdad who saw a little girl playing with a piece of unexploded ordnance on a street near where he was guarding a station. He pushed her aside and threw himself on it just as it exploded. He left a family desolate in California and a little girl a live in Baghdad.

The stars who deserve media attention are not the ones who have lavish weddings on TV but the ones who patrol the streets of Mosul even after two of their buddies were murdered and their bodies battered and stripped for the sin of trying to protect Iraqis from terrorists. We put couples with incomes of $100 million a year on the covers of magazines.

The noncoms and officers who barely scrape by on military pay but stand on guard in Afghanistan and Iraq and on ships and in submarines and near the Arctic Circle are anonymous as they live and die.

I am no longer comfortable being a part of the system that has such poor values, and I do not want to perpetuate those values by pretending that who is eating at Morton’s is a big subject. There are plenty of other stars in the American firmament….the policemen and women who go off on] patrol in South Central and have no idea if they will return alive. The orderlies and paramedics who bring in people who have been in terrible accidents and prepare them for surgery, the teachers and nurses who throw their whole spirits into caring for autistic children, the kind men and women who work in hospices and in cancer wards. Think of each and every fireman who was running up the stairs at the World Trade Center as the towers began to collapse.

Now you have my idea of a real hero. We are not responsible for the operation of the universe, and what happens to us is not terribly important.

God is real, not a fiction, and when we turn over our lives to Him, he takes far better care of us than we could ever do for ourselves. In a word, we make ourselves sane when we fire ourselves as the directors of the movie of our lives and turn the power over to Him.

I came to realize that life lived to help others is the only one that matters. This is my highest and best use as a human. I can put it another way. Years ago, I realized I could never be as great an actor as Olivier or as good a comic as Steve Martin–or Martin Mull or Fred Willard–or as good an economist as Samuelson or Friedman, or as good a writer as Fitzgerald. Or even remotely close to any of them. But I could be a devoted father to my son, husband to my wife and, above all, a good son to the parents who had done so much for me. This came to be my main task in life. I did it moderately well with my son, pretty well with my wife and well indeed with my parents (with my sister’s help). I cared for and paid attention to them in their declining years. I stayed with my father as he got sick, went into extremis, into a coma, and then entered immortality with my sister and me reading him the Psalms.

This was the only point at which my life touched the lives of the soldiers in Iraq or the firefighters in New York. I came to realize that life lived to help others is the only one that matters and that it is my duty, in return for the lavish life God has devolved upon me, to help others He has placed in my path. This is my highest and best use as a human.

EDITORS NOTE: These same arguments apply to the so called "stars" when it comes to politics and social issues. 

It seems that all they really believe is the ilk that is spewed in the anti-American, anti-capitalism, anti-military, anti-religion, and anti-morality films that they appear in and watch.  Playing in a war film does make you a hero, playing a farmers wife does not make you a farm expert, playing a college professor does not make you a genius, but being a directors mistress will get you staring role.

Joe McCarthy's methods might be questioned, but his primus was correct, Hollywood was and is  full of Socialist/Communist.--WD

Comments are invited!
Send feedback to: 

Friday, March 2, 2018

Thursday, March 1, 2018

The U.S. Commission On Immagration Reform (1995)

The U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform was mandated by the Immigration Act of 1990 in order to examine and evaluate U.S. immigration policy, and to provide recommendations for its improvement.
The Commission was chaired by Barbara Jordan (D) Rep TX. (See ** below)
The Commission’s initial recommendations were released in 1995, and were endorsed by President Clinton. The final report was presented to Congress in 1997. 
President Clinton said the proposals “reflect a balanced immigration policy that makes the most of our diversity while protecting the American work force so that we can better compete in the emerging global economy.

“We are a nation of immigrants, dedicated to the rule of law. That is our history – and it is our challenge to ourselves.…It is literally a matter of who we are as a nation and who we become as a people. E Pluribus Unum. Out of many, one. One people. The American people.”- Barbara Jordan, August 1995
The Commission’s Guiding Principles
1) Clear goals and priorities must define U.S. immigration policy;
2) Effective policy means enforcement of immigration limits;

3) Regular review is needed to ensure flexibility to adjust to changing circumstances in the United States;

4) Immigration policy should be comprehensible and its implementation efficient;
5) Sponsors are responsible for ensuring that immigrants do not become burdens on the American taxpayer;

6) Immigration policy must protect U.S. workers against unfair competition from foreign workers, with an appropriately higher level of protection for the most vulnerable in our society;
7) Both temporary and permanent admissions categories must be seen as integral parts of a cohesive immigration policy;

8) A sound immigration policy supports Americanization, meaning that immigrants share with Americans such values as the belief in liberty, democracy, and equal opportunity;
9) Fundamental immigration reform requires a period of transition to get from the present system to the new one.

The Commission’s Recommendations
Following the above principles, the Commission recommended the creation of a “credible, coherent immigrant and immigration policy” and a “credible, efficient naturalization process” which included the following:

·        A scale back of family chain-migration by implementing a prioritization of nuclear family relationships to determine who will be admitted through family-based immigration. Spouses and minor children of US citizens would continue to be admitted as first priority.

·        Elimination of other family-based admission categories, including:

·        Adult children of U.S. citizens;

·        Adult children of legal permanent residents,

·        Siblings of U.S. citizens.

·        A focus on the admission of highly-skilled individuals whose skills would benefit our society.

·        Recommended the elimination of the admission of unskilled workers and elimination of the diversity visa lottery.

·        Immigration admissions level of 550,000 per year, to be divided as follows:

·        Nuclear family immigration 400,000;

·        Skill-based immigration 100,000;

·        Refugee resettlement 50,000.

·        Stressed that deportation is crucial. “Credibility in immigration policy can be summed up in one sentence: those who should get in, get in; those who should be kept out, are kept out; and those who should not be here will be required to leave.”

**  Barbara Jordan (1936-1996) was a Civil Rights leader and a pioneering public servant. She was the first African-American woman elected to the Texas Senate (1966), the first woman from Texas to be elected to the U.S Congress (1973-1979), and the first African-American to deliver the keynote address at a Democratic National Convention (1976).
Comments are invited!
Send feedback to:   WatchDog 

Monday, February 26, 2018

"Organization For Action" (OFA): Obama's Effort To End Democracy

by Charles Krauthammer
I do not understand how living in a country with its democracy established over 200 years ago, and now, for the first time in history, suddenly we have one of our former presidents set up a group called "Organizing for Action" (OFA).

OFA is 30,000+ strong and working to disrupt everything that our current president’s administration is trying to do. This organization goes against our Democracy, and it is an operation that will destroy our way of governing. It goes against our Constitution, our laws, and the processes established over 200 years ago. If it is allowed to proceed then we will be living in chaos very much like third world countries are run. What good is it to have an established government if it is not going to be respected and allowed to follow our laws?
If you had an army some 30,000 strong and a court system stacked over the decades with judges who would allow you to break the laws, how much damage could you do to a country? We are about to find out in America!
Our ex-president said he was going to stay involved through community organizing and speak out on the issues and that appears to be one post-administration promise he intends to keep. He has moved many of his administration's top dogs over to Organizing for Action.
OFA is behind the strategic and tactical implementation of the resistance to the Trump Administration that we are seeing across America, and politically active courts are providing the leverage for this revolution.
OFA is dedicated to organizing communities for "progressive" change. Its issues are gun control, socialist healthcare, abortion, sexual equality, climate change, and of course, immigration reform.
OFA members were propped up by the ex-president's message from the shadows: "Organizing is the building block of everything great we have accomplished Organizers around the country are fighting for change in their communities and OFA is one of the groups on the front lines. Commit to this work in 2017 and beyond."
OFA's website says it obtained its "digital" assets from the ex-president's re-election effort and that he inspired the movement. In short, it is the shadow government organization aimed at resisting and tearing down the Constitutional Republic we know as AMERICA.
Paul Sperry, writing for the New York Post, says, “The OFA will fight President Donald Trump at every turn of his presidency and the ex-president will command them from a bunker less than two miles from the White House."
Sperry writes that, “The ex-president is setting up a shadow government to sabotage the Trump administration through a network of non-profits led by OFA, which is growing its war chest (more than $40 million) and has some 250 offices nationwide. The OFA IRS filings, according to Sperry, indicate that the OFA has 32,525 (and growing) volunteers nationwide. The ex-president and his wife will oversee the operation from their home/ office in Washington DC.
Think about how this works.. For example: Trump issues an immigration executive order; the OFA signals for protests and statements from pro-immigrant groups; the ACLU lawyers file lawsuits in jurisdictions where activist judges obstruct the laws; volunteers are called to protest at airports and Congressional town hall meetings; the leftist media springs to action in support of these activities; the twitter sphere lights up with social media; and violence follows. All of this happens from the ex-president's signal that he is heartened by the protests.
If Barack Obama did not do enough to destroy this country in the 8 years he was in office, it appears his future plans are to destroy the foundation on which this country has operated on for the last 241 years.
If this does not scare you, then we are in worse trouble than you know.
So, do your part. You have read it, so at least pass this on so others will know what we are up against. We are losing our country and we are so compliant. We are becoming a "PERFECT TARGET" for our enemy!

Comments are invited!
Send feedback to:  WatchDog