The ultimate "What if...?" in American history

I love, love, love history, even more than Nine Inch Nails. It fascinates me to no end, especially American history. I am not sure if somebody favoring the left side of American politics (especially the further left they lean) can truly be as enamored of American history as somebody who leans right. I say this because, as I see it, our early American history is solidly built upon modern conservative values and traditions whereas modern liberalism/progressivism/statism/leftism poo-poos what our Founders valued as necessary for a successful early formation of our country. I will actually expand on those thoughts in a future post but the purpose of this one is to highlight a date in history which hardly anybody would think to name as crucial to the existence of the United States as the world knows her today. That date is July 28, 1588. See why it is crucially important below:

Born to Hate.... but opened his eyes

I absolutely adore the vast majority of the dozens of Prager University videos and will be posting numerous ones over time but this is certainly one of my favorites. It highlights a British man of Pakistani descent who was conditioned to hate only Jews and anybody who might support them, wherever they may be. As he developed into a mature Muslim, he felt his devotion to Islam and his teachings meant he needed to travel to Pakistan to join a jihadist group in order to prove his deep hatred for all things non-Muslim. Before his departure, he stumbled upon a pro-Israel book and was intellectually curious enough to read it with at least a somewhat open mind. Still full of hate, he was determined to travel to Israel to prove Jews were everything he was trained to believe. What he found was anything but a nation full of hateful, intolerant and divisive people dedicated to world dominance, but especially the eternally oppressed Palestinians. He found what he had been taught for over two decades was patently false and is now an outspoken advocate for Israel and Jews worldwide.

Here is a 2012 article about Kasim Hafeez which sheds more light on his experience.

Gender Pay Gap, Really?

From President Obama on down to grade-school students, there is a narrative flourishing across the country (primarily on the left side of the political aisle) which posits a gender pay gap exists on the order of about 23% or so.

If true, the obvious question becomes: Why would employers hire any men if women were available to fulfill any given position if it meant saving 20+% of what is often the greatest business expense employers have? Which CEO would not embrace that hiring practice?

Here is an awesome video showing just how bogus the "pay gap" truly is and why anybody who insists there is rampant economic sexism in the workplace is not to be trusted, especially after researching the facts.

Voter ID: Who favors it, and why?

I can only speak for myself on this issue and this is what my argument comes down to:

Besides the physical act of voting, what other action can any human perform which is of greater consequence for your future, your family's future, your neighbor's future, your community's future, your city's future, your state's future and your nation's future?

With your vote being such a powerfully and uniquely consequential act, why should you not have to prove you are the one and only human on the planet allowed to cast a vote in your name for who/whatever candidate, proposition, initiative, judge, etc. you alone feel is most beneficial for you, your family, your neighborhood, your city, your state and/or your nation? How better to prove you are you than presenting a valid state-issued photo ID at a polling station? This deeply personal and consequential decision could have repercussions for many years, decades/lifetime even, so why should this most obvious of obvious reasons be debated?

On a wider scale, Gallup conducted a 2016 poll on voting preferences (early voting, ID requirements and automatic voter registration) and the results certainly speak volumes:

I was focusing on the photo ID requirement angle in this post and even large majorities of Democrats and non-whites favor this sensible action but an important question posed by Gallup dealt with early voting. In my research, I found as many as 13 states either do not allow early voting at all or only allow valid in-person absentee excuses for early voting. What I find most interesting about this is the fury unleashed by Democrats against states who do allow early voting but decide to reduce either the number of early voting locations, number of days to early vote and/or the times of day a given early polling location is left open. Normally, the excuses given for any of these adjustments is financially driven but said fury is directed at accusations of voter suppression and all the other usual complaints by Democrats. My point is this: where is the fury against the 13 states which only allow specific reasons for voting early or, more importantly, do not allow any early voting whatsoever?

Here is a video I like to share with anybody who believes blacks cannot be allowed to be inconvenienced under the guise of voter suppression:

Unintended Consequences

If there was ever a situation where political "unintended consequences" played out, perhaps this takes the cake..... I wondered for years what might be the most consequential outcome for the Democratic Party's decades of increasingly intolerant and rabid support for abortion and I guess Trump's win was the most demonstrable outcome yet to materialize.

Since Hillary lost her second (and last?) chance at the White House due to a relative handful of votes going for Trump in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, this article's author did some number-crunching and found it quite possibly came down to the aborted babies making the difference between a Hillary win and a Trump win. Of course, this is impossible to prove but it sure is an interesting take on why/how Trump won.

The Left's Own Goal

Applied to Wisconsin, that means that in the 25 years under consideration, abortion providers can be projected to have eliminated 151,740 black, 80,085 Hispanic, and 155,955 white potential voters.

If they had shown up at the polls in November and followed national polling averages regarding candidates and racial preferences, 88% of the blacks would have voted for Hillary and 8% for Trump, 65% of the Hispanics would have voted for Hillary and 29% for Trump, and 58% of the whites would have voted for Trump compared to 37% for Hillary.

In other words, had those babies been protected rather than aborted, had they all shown up to vote (admittedly a stretch) and if national patterns of abortion by race and voting by race held true, Trump would have netted an additional total of about 125,000 black, white and Hispanic voters to add to his 2016 total. Hillary would have gained a net of just shy of 243,000 additional black, white and Hispanic voters.

Added to their respective vote totals of November (1,409,467 Trump vs. 1,382,210 Hillary) Clinton would have carried Wisconsin by a total of 1,625,201 to 1,534,467, or more than 90,000 votes.

If the same scenario is applied to Trump’s narrow wins in states like Michigan or Pennsylvania, where the percentage of black and Hispanic voters is considerably higher than in Wisconsin, the conclusion is inescapable: The Democrats themselves, in their role as the obedient legislative lapdogs of Planned Parenthood, pursued policies that aborted Hillary out of ‘her shot’ at the White House. By successfully producing in the United States one of the world’s most inhumane and unregulated systems of abortion law, they ensured the success of their opponents.

New NIN - This Isn't the Place

Here is my favorite cut from NIN's latest release:

Why Carry a Gun?

I found this today and thought it was a fabulous explanation why there are countless millions of American gun owners who understand and appreciate the wisdom of the 2nd Amendment and of the Founders:



Why Carry a Gun?

I don’t carry a gun to kill people.
I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

I don’t carry a gun to scare people.
I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m paranoid.
I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m evil.
I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.

I don’t carry a gun because I hate the government.
I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m angry.
I carry a gun so that I don’t have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.

I don’t carry a gun because I want to shoot someone.
I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.

I don’t carry a gun to make me feel like a man.
I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.

I don’t carry a gun because I feel inadequate.
I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.

I don’t carry a gun because I love it.
I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.

Police protection is an oxymoron. Free citizens must protect themselves.
Police do not protect you from crime, they usually just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.

— Author unknown, but obviously brilliant

My response to a challenge to provide my top five examples of American greatness...

I was recently challenged during an online debate to list five reasons I believe America is uniquely great. This is what I replied with:

The most obvious must be the founders' understanding of human nature and human history so they knew how to craft their founding documents, and supporting documents, to best prevent a government from going down the natural path of starting out, or become, too centralized and powerful. They knew the best chance at success in securing liberty, property rights, etc. meant limiting the federal government to specific enumerated powers, hence the Bill of Rights. They knew the real power belongs to the states and their citizens for they elect their representatives to the seats of power in DC and elsewhere and they serve the will of their constituents, not the other way around. This is why the Electoral College exists as it does.

Second is probably the 2nd Amendment, without which no others can truly be ensured. The writings of the day clearly state the expectations were for weapons to exist in the hands, and be at the disposal, of American citizens if they wanted them, hence the "keep and bear arms" phrase. Again, the founders knew human nature and history and knew defense of self and country required citizens to be armed as they saw fit. Per nature, the founders also knew weapons would become ever more advanced but there is no reason to believe they would change their amendment to account for today's weaponry. The fact guns protect countless lives every day, and not just against others with guns, is perhaps the most obvious explanation for why the uniqueness of the 2nd Amendment is what contributes to making America great.

Third is probably the unparalleled generosity of the American people, especially our willingness to fight tyranny, oppression, etc. around the world despite often never expecting anything in return. We saw this in Korea, Vietnam, Bosnia and elsewhere where those freed people had nothing of worth (natural resources, money, etc.) to pay for our efforts. Also, our military exists to defend not only our citizens but those of our allies. Without US influence, is there any doubt the world would be a much different place, and not in a good way? How many great world or regional powers in human history did not seek to overtake their neighbors and/or forcefully create outposts to project their influence? The US does not want to go to war but God help you if you want to fight, just like the Israelis. Our public generosity extends domestically, of course, as well but this is long enough already.

Fourth: Despite being an atheist, I clearly believe in, understand and appreciate the Judeo-Christian value system our country was founded on. This does not at all mean I think religion was, or should be, the foundation of our government and the writings of the day are crystal clear on this. Perhaps only an English language requirement as an official language should have been enshrined in the US Constitution, if anything, but that is for another debate. However, there is no doubt this religion and morality were bedrocks of the founding documents hence "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other" from John Adams and the Declaration's "endowed by our creator", among countless other examples.

Fifth: Perhaps last in this list, which could certainly go on much longer, is our freedom of innovation and entrepreneurship, which is directly tied to our 1st Amendment. Who else has more Nobel Prizes? There has never been another place on the planet where people have gone to such great lengths to cross our borders in search of unmatched liberty, opportunity, adventure, etc.. Our markets are the envy of the world and being successful in the US in pretty much anything (industry, sports, entertainment, etc.) means unparalleled opportunities at wealth and influence.

Which extremist group is more deadly? The common "per 100,000" metric....

The short answer is jihadists in America are an average of 133.20 times more deadly than white and/or Christian extremists when taking into account how many US Muslims exist compared to whites and/or Christians in the US. There have been 186.91 times more deadly jihadi attacks per capita than white extremist attacks and 273.29 times more than Christian extremist attacks since then. See how I came up with these shocking calculations below....

Since 9/11, there has been a talking point among the media and Democrats (yes, I know, they are practically one and the same and henceforth referred to as "the left" in this post). It goes like this..... right-wing (read: white and/or Christian) extremists among us are more deadly than Muslim extremists. They often highlight the Dylan Roof massacre of nine black parishioners in Charleston, SC on 6/17/15 as the most powerful example. Several other lesser known or lower-body count murders by other non-Muslim extremists are also counted. Not included are several non-politically and/or non-religiously motivated killings such as Aurora's James Holmes, Sandy Hook's Adam Lanza, Tuscon's Jared Lee Loughner and others. These exclusions are understandable and welcome.

On the surface, it would seem the numbers support the hype since there have been almost double the number of deadly attacks by right-wing extremists than Muslim extremists (henceforth referred to as jihadists). Shortly after the Charleston massacre and especially after the Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood killings of three by Robert Lewis Dear Jr. on 11/27/15, the left crowed about the body count disparity being about 48 to 26 dead. According to them, that was rock-solid, irrefutable proof of how much more hateful, dangerous and deadly the right-wing in America is than not only jihadis but also anybody who might favor the Democratic Party. It is as though they not-so-secretly hope and pray each mass killing was/will be conducted by a rabid, NRA card-carrying, GOP bumper-sticker sporting, gas-guzzling/exhaust-belching monster truck driving, racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic redneck hillbilly and most importantly (above all else)..... a Trump supporter!

Under the surface, the numbers tell a remarkably different story, especially after 11/27/15. Also, one does not need to limit the numbers to after that date because the numbers do not favor the left before then either.

There is a left-wing organization called New America Foundation which has been referenced repeatedly in left-wing publications and websites (see here, here, here, and here) in particular during the days, weeks and months preceding the Orlando massacre. The site provides detailed records of each extremist attack, along with a running total for Jihadist (95), Far Right-Wing (51) and a new category: Black Separatist/Nationalist/Supremacist (8). I guess with the advent of Black Lives Matter, there is now a need to add a new category of extremism in America. Not good. An important note: as of the date of this initial blog post (6/18/17), the body count for the far right wing shows 53 killed but it includes the 5/26/17 Portland train stabbing of two unarmed protectors of a Muslim woman being harassed by a white man. The site highlights the killer's use of anti-immigrant hate speech, supporting Timothy McVeigh, posting white supremacist views on social media and more. What it does not highlight is the killer's support of socialist Senator Bernie Sanders and Green Party candidate Jill Stein in 2016. With this bit of very important news omitted from the site's explanation for including him in their "Far Right Wing" category, I cannot include his needless murder of two good Samaritans. If anything, it should have been left off the site entirely due to his history being nebulous.

Here is the purpose of this post and precisely why the numbers do not favor the left's narrative of which extremists are more deadly. I will be updating this post as inevitable future attacks occur, unfortunately. The key to this is the population percentage of each group compared to the total US population and how many deaths each group is responsible for as a percentage of the overall US population. In other words: per capita, just as pretty much all other crime stats are figured.

As of 2015, Non-Hispanic Whites are by far the largest fraction of US citizens at 61% (195,645,900 of 318,868,500) and Christians are by far the largest denomination at 75% (nearly 280,000,000 or so). US Muslims in 2015 were considerably less populous at about 2.1% (3.3 million). Based purely on sheer numbers of the available pool of possible white or Christian extremists, it makes total sense deaths at their hands might be considerably higher than every other extremist possibility. However, at this point in US history since 9/11, the numbers say otherwise.

As I said earlier, the media, Democrats and others giddily highlighted a time when the numbers were solidly in favor of their anti-white, anti-Christian narrative, before the end of November, 2015. December, 2015 brought us the San Bernardino killings of 14 by Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, a married Muslim couple, bumping the body count closer to even at 48-45. At this point, surely the Democrats and the media are beginning to sweat the numbers since they know all it takes is one more mass killing in the name of Islam to ruin their narrative and that could happen at any moment.

That unfortunate moment arrived on 6/12/16 in Orlando, FL when the pro-Hillary, anti-Trump, ISIS-supporting Omar Mateen massacred 49 defenseless patrons of the Pulse nightclub where some, if not many, of them were homosexuals. Most likely this caused a great deal of consternation on the left because two of the three most protected identity groups of the left were involved in very different ways in this event: Muslims and the LGBTQ community (third most-protected group being blacks). "A Muslim killed a bunch of gays!!! What should we do? I know, let's blame the gun, like always."

Now... the meat of the post: Let's use the immediate post-Charleston body count of 48/26 and link them to the proportion of whites in the US, the proportion of Christians in the US and finally the proportion of Muslims in the US. This is broken down into a calculation which measures the common crime statistic of ### per 100,000 of the population, which is about 323 million now. 

48 deaths at the hands of white extremists vs. the population of 195,645,000 whites equals .0245 extremist deaths per 100,000 whites, or .0149 white extremist deaths per 100,000 Americans. 48 deaths at the hands of Christian extremists vs. the population of 280,000,000 equals .0171 extremist deaths per 100,000 Christians, or the same .0149 Christian extremist deaths per 100,000 Americans.

26 deaths at the hands of jihadis vs. the population of 3,300,000 US Muslims equals .7879 jihadi deaths per 100,000 US Muslims, or .0080 jihadi deaths per 100,000 Americans.

Pre-San Bernardino, jihadis, as a percentage of the US Muslim population, were 32.16x more deadly than white extremists and 46.08x more deadly than Christian extremists, making the average 39.12x higher. As of this posting (6/18/17), with the ratio now 95 jihadi deaths vs. 51 white/Christian extremist deaths, the increase jumps to 108.23x and 158.16x, respectively. The average is now 133.20x higher than US white/Christian extremist deaths. 

With 11 jihadi attacks killing 95 people, their average deaths per attack is 8.64. Whites have 19 attacks with 51 deaths equaling 2.68 deaths per attack. Considering the 11 jihadi attacks from a population of 3.3 million US Muslims vs. the 19 white and/or Christian extremist attacks from their 196 million and 280 million member US population, respectively, jihadis contribute 186.91x more attacks per capita than whites and 273.29x more than Christians in the US since 9/11.

The entire point of this marathon post is to highlight the wildly disproportionate number of US citizens killed by the relatively teeny-tiny population of US Muslims compared to orders of magnitude higher populations of US whites and US Christians. Because of the major difference between the US Muslim vs. white and/or Christian populations, it does show the average person going about their business in the US is 2.1375 times more likely to be killed by the average Christian and 1.8625 times more likely to be killed by the average white person. That is not debatable but based on the site favored by the left until recently, you and I are over 100x more likely to be killed by an Omar Mateen than a Dylan Roof on any given day. 

"Head Like a Hole": The first of many NIN posts...

“Trent Reznor is Nine Inch Nails” - liner notes from the 1989 debut album, "Pretty Hate Machine".

It was sometime in 1990, the year I graduated high school and joined the Army, when I first heard of Nine Inch Nails. I have no idea when exactly nor what local station might have played it but I do remember hearing the first hit from their first album, "Pretty Hate Machine". It was called "Head Like a Hole" and was a major departure from the common music of the day, at least what I most often listened to in the rock and pop genres.

"Head Like a Hole" introduced the music world to the genre of "industrial rock" but NIN did not invent the genre. I don't want to get any further into that except to say NIN quickly became the genre's most recognizable band. This is an obvious "turn it up!" song when lucky enough to hear it on the radio.

Original video:

2013 tour version :

Here is a pretty good cover of "Head Like a Hole":

...and an even better one:

Back at it.....

Well, I have returned to updating this blog with my thoughts on the issues of the day, with a decidedly conservatarian opinion based heavily on facts, history and common-sense on my side. I welcome any and all opposing viewpoints but it would be wise to have your own readily-available facts and history on your side to debate with. In case you have not noticed yet, my comments/posts will be quite lengthy so bear with me if I do not reply immediately.

This is the day of the shooting of the GOP Congressional baseball players in Alexandria, VA by a very angry, hard-left, progressive 66 year-old early this morning. I only mention that to best have this be remembered as the day I returned to blogging. This is not to say it triggered my return to commentary. It was only a coincidence since I started this post yesterday evening.

My last post was on October 7th, 2015 and so much has happened since then. I wanted to get back to blogging to better express my opinions and beliefs but, more importantly, to have a dedicated and easy method to share them with others.

Obviously, we have a new president, Donald Trump. WTF!!! Who truly saw that coming, huh? Republicans have retained control of Congress and increased their control of state houses and governorships. I guess there is something to the notion of consequences.

What do I mean by that? Consequences for calling people terrible names for simply disagreeing with Democrats on such things as immigration, marriage, climate change, refugees, economics, health care/insurance, education, voting and pretty much everything else nowadays. It seems to not take much to trigger the left into fits of anger and demonstrations of violence and intolerance.

What I expect to be posting primarily over the coming days, weeks, months and years is my take on politics, with a focus on the widespread and painfully obvious hypocrisy, dangerous rhetoric, etc. by the Democratic Party/progressives/liberals/statists/leftists (leftists being my preferred term) among us, in particular in Washington, Hollywood, the media, sports and more. "Fairness" is most often a term used by the left around the world to supposedly highlight inequality, authoritarianism, etc., perpetrated, in their eyes, by right-wingers of all stripes and only them. What I expect to highlight is this is far from the case, and in reality is a left-wing phenomenon in many more cases than not.

All this is my way to best explain how I simply cannot fathom voting for a representative of the left of any party, or no party. I want to do this as a way to vent my frustration with what I see as among the most obvious reasons for the decline of our national civility, our international prominence and much more.

Being a Nine Inch Nails fan, you can expect a sprinkling of NIN news, favorite videos and more, as well.