Category: BW Member Blog

I often find it interesting how those on the left say “the Republicans need to do X in order for voters to accept them”. Hmmm… So this actually begs the question: Do you know what a political party is?

This of course seems like a no-brainer, sure that guy is a Democrat because he says this and that guy is a Republican because he’s against the Democrat. So let’s get into what a party is, not defining where each stands, but the general concept.

A political party is short-hand.

It really is that simple. When you have a “Legalize Marijuana” party you fairly understand what they’re looking to do. How often though does anyone go to them and tell them they should lay off the munchies? “You need to get those voters, dude, so how about backing away from the Doritoes…..”

So how do you like your Crème Brule? With extra wheat grass and roof tar? What are you talking about, that’s what a Crème Brule is right?

A label of something has a specific definition, a political party is no different. When you say you believe in X Y Z you then can compare and contrast with the current labels to see where you just about match. There’s never going to be an exact fit, never can be, otherwise there would be a “you” party of one. So when you say your values, opinions and beliefs are such-a-such you’re going with a standard that’s been set. You don’t change the standard to suit you though, it’s like saying I can’t run the mile so I’ll change the measurement to 30 grunyos. (Made that up.) It’s still a mile. (A Pluto is still a planet pinheads!) The labels are immutable, it’s how you try to fit to those standards is what you need to figure out.

Now how come the Democrats can’t be more like Republicans? Often Democrats often allude that something said is “racist” for example, yet when Democrats actually do things that are racist it’s ignored. What if I were to say then that Democrats should be less racist like the Republicans? That entire paragraph is total bullshit by the way.

Then why is it any less when Democrats say Republicans should be more like them? Because that’s not the objective. What’s really being said is “you don’t agree with me so no one vote for this guy!” Often it’s meant only to go to people’s emotions and not to their intelligence, which in-of-itself is an insult.

“He’s a racist!!!” Doesn’t even have to have any evidence, just the charge, and you get a knee-jerk reaction to stay away from “that guy”.

So when the Democrats keep saying someone needs to do this it’s never in the best interest of that person, it’s a means to silence the opposition. It’s actually an offensive tactic that should leave everyone saying “you first”.

I once saw a bumper sticker that said “Visualize Peace”. At that point I had a “moment of clarity”. I understand what the Left is trying to do and say. I had the natural rejoinder: “Of course we can have peace, it’s real easy and we can do it now. Everyone must agree with me.”

That essentially is what Democrats, whether in power, the media, the activists, whatever, they’re all saying that everyone must agree with them. We have to give up what we want and what we need and what we desire so that we can go along with that vision of THEIRS, of world peace.

We can have world peace today but you need to agree with ME. No? hmmm…. How can I get you to agree with me…. Well I can talk with you, explain the wonders of agreeing with me, anecdotes, facts, statistics, maybe have it in iambic pentameter just to be silly. Still no?

I know, bribery, I’ll pay you to agree with me, but I don’t have a lot of money, do I look like George Soros? I know the Federal Treasury has plenty I can just tax everyone and then give it to you so you can agree with me. Still no?

Maybe I’m telling it in a way that’s off-putting to you, after all it’s a pretty sweet deal in my eye, so maybe I’ll say it in a different way. What do you mean I’m lying, of course not, I don’t need deceit and trickery, although that isn’t a bad idea after all we are trying to get to world peace.

So I’ve tried everything I can think of to get you to agree with me, it must be that you’re at fault then. Couldn’t possibly be my ideas are bad, you’re just a hater. Hey, no one listen to this hater!!! Hater says what? Hater says what? Neener neener hay…ter…

Oh now people are listening to him instead of my wonderful ideas? I already told them that he’s a hater, so they must be haters too. And haters, well, they get what they deserve, after all hate kills. Since we can’t have hate ruin our world peace it’s appropriate to use whatever means we can to get them to go away and be quiet. Look, a black man in a wheel chair…… people peacefully protesting……didn’t you know you never bring a knife to a gun-fight? After all world peace is at stake and you’re in the way.

Yes, funny how that always happens, doesn’t it. Nice car by the way, fits your sticker well.

(I wrote this in 2012, also on the same blog.)

During my college years, oh mumblemumble years ago, I remember reading a story I wish I could recall the name or the author. So if anyone reading this happens to know of the story I’m referencing here please let me know. I have seen the story-line often portrayed in various iterations in tv and movie programs since then so I believe it’s a well-known tale. Anyway…

There once was a town called Paradise. All the people were happy and healthy, enjoying life as any other town would. However they had a special edge that no other town had, for it was that for one full day one member of the town would be visited by all the sorrows of the town so that the rest of the town would have joy and remain sorrow-free. The choosing was done by simple lottery, and since there were many people in the town the likelihood that the same person received the sorrows was perhaps months in-between.

One day there came upon a man who said “surely those that are young of age, who have not known sorrow in their lives, should not be made to experience such grand sorrow so soon”. The people of the town  talked about it and finally agreed that the children would not be part of the lottery.

Another man spoke up, “surely those that have lived for so long, that have already seen their fair share of sorrow on their own, should not continue such grand sorrow.” Again they talked and agreed that those of ongoing years have earned their rest and not be put into the lottery.

A third man rose to speak, “surely those that are lame, who have suffered disease and pain, should not be made to take on so many others’ grand sorrow”. Some disagreed but they finally relented lest they be called cold of heart.

So as time continued as time does, the number of people in the lottery became fewer and fewer. Those that remained began to receive the sorrow more often than they had before. Over time other people rose and gave reasons to have names removed, and more often those that remained continued the sorrow to the point it was almost daily. When they complained their cries were ignored, after all it was a fair price for everyone else’s joy they were told.

Ultimately these few could no longer sustain the sorrow and decided to leave Paradise. Without them the spell was broken and all in the town were visited by their own sorrows.

We see these lessons today where we demand some people to pay for the leisure of others and yet cry they aren’t paying their “fair share”. We see businesses leave over-taxed states or even to other countries to flee burdensome governments, whether local or federal. It has become a fetish in this country to insist on killing the golden geese instead of recognizing and respecting the good they do, all the while shouting down complaint.

I also find it amazing how, to take a recent-in-the-news example, if Senator Blowhard was to introduce legislation for say require teenagers to require parent’s permission for birth control that’s decried as “the slippery slope!!”, yet an imperious President orders private businesses to pay for birth control, that’s ok. What if, using the same mechanism that President Obama set up, I were to use that same logic to shut down abortion, it’s the same switch and lever.

During the 2000 election, the actual Election day in fact, I had an argument with a friend. I explained that the machine that the left was creating at some point will be manned by someone they don’t agree with, so would she still support creating such a behemoth. Of course George Bush won, and she stopped talking with me, I wonder why.

The lesson of the town of Paradise is that we as a nation can lift a mountain with hardly any effort at all, yet it is this compulsion that some have to exclude essentially themselves from the normal everyday consequences of life. At times those “grand sorrows” are more for some then others, yet we all get them and we all deal with them. The thought of “well we can manage that another way” is what ultimately causes the decline of a town, a state, a country, to the point where a few need to lift that mountain and it becomes impossible. This becomes  no longer “fair” and Paradise ceases to be.

(From my patent-pending, action-packed, death-defying….ok hardly read blog at gschneyer.wordpress.com)

There once was a dog named Spot. He was your basic mutt, a mix of breeds from all around. His owner was as conscientious as any other owner, regrettably though over the years he fell into the usual routine. Spot would yelp for food, so he would get the food whenever he wanted. However the owner wouldn’t watch over how much he gave. Over time Spot would get heavier and heavier, to the point where just walking would make poor Spot lethargic and wheezing. Where in his youth he would bark enough to cause ner’do’wells to pass his house by, now they openly mock him.

It’s of course quite apparent that something has to be done. Spot’s health is getting worse by the day, some even warned the owner of the urgency. Yet the owner, although still caring for Spot, simply did not see the danger.

“Perhaps if you just put Spot on a diet?” some suggested.

“And starve my poor dog? Surely he will die! You fiends!”

“No no, just do with a little less, that way he gets back to his youthful size and he can run and play and not sound all wheezy, ok?”

“That will make him skin and bones, he’s working just fine as he is, I will never listen to anyone who hates dogs as much as you do!”

The point of course is that our government, whom we as a society have entrusted for a specific purpose, has grown past that purpose. It is bloated and wheezing, a mockery among the international community. Every time there are serious people who suggest one dollar less to the government there’s a reaction as though they’re suggesting a complete and total dismantling of the government.

“Close that office? (That’s obsolete, redundant, and duplicates three other offices) Why you want to shut down all of the entire United States?!? Good day Sir! I said ‘Good Day’!”

The idea that every dollar sent to government is a) beneficial, b) efficiently used, c) used for its stated and intended purpose, d) used in a manner that cannot in any way be duplicated in the private sector in a more beneficial and efficient manner, is as cruel as feeding a dog more and more without limit.

Passengers on Cruise Ships U.S. citizens, particularly travelers with underlying health conditions, should not travel by cruise ship.  CDC notes increased risk of infection of COVID-19 in a cruise ship environment. In order to curb the spread of COVID-19, many countries have implemented strict screening procedures that have denied port entry rights to ships and […]