Courage among the cowards: woman stands up to ax wielding killers

It’s not just about gun control or religion or rights. It’s about the direction this world is going. It’s about how parents are raising their children. It’s about being in fear of standing up for not just what you believe it… but what is right. I fear that even this post will be slammed because of the misdirection of our generation. I don’t know how you could disagree with Glenn Beck here. He’s spot on. Here’s some of what he says in the video below:

“There was one individual that stood up. One,” “It was a woman that stood up. In fact, she didn’t stand up. She first had to stand up, reach up, pull the little string to ring the bell so the bus would stop that she was on, so she got off the bus because she saw blood in the streets. She looked around all the sheep being led right directly to slaughter and walked up to the guy with the blood on his hands.”

“This woman approached him, confronted him. She then looked back at the crowd with contempt and disgust. You know what made her stand up in the bus? She said her Christian belief. She’s a Catholic. Her Christian belief. When she found out it wasn’t an accident, why did she pursue him? Because she said there were children there and she didn’t ‑‑ better to happen to her than a child.”

“Where were the rest of the sheep?”

Oh Newt… why’d you go and do that? Now you’ve given pretty much everyone who disagrees with your otherwise good philosophies to slam you. Especially all the tech companies and organizations (mostly Liberal — which I’ve always thought it was ironic given the risk for a lack of Internet freedom motivated by none other than the Liberal Party, and some ignorant republicans that I refuse to include myself with.).

I understand what he’s trying to say. That the names smartphone or cellphone just don’t do the device justice. In fact, there’s a Gizmodo article to back up that thinking. But Newt, darn it… you’re making yourself look like an idiot. It’s simply called a smartphone. The name’s been around since the ’90s. Sometimes just let the chips fall where they may and accept the name that’s been placed to it. It’s primary function is still a phone, despite it’s other awesome capabilities. So I think it’s aptly named.

Second, why didn’t anyone stop him from filming this? Or at least help him tweak the message a little more and replace “cellphone” in the script with “smartphone”? He certainly has a staff who oversees all of these videos, right? None of them said anything?

Oh well. The damage is done. And a lot more is to come. It’s too bad he made this video. I understand what he’s saying — that it’s an incredible device and has so much more potential than even what we do with it, but the message here is all wrong and instead 99%, if not more, will focus on his “unintelligible” thinking that he doesn’t know what a smartphone is, which he does — he just didn’t convey that here.

If you want to see his defensive tweets backing up the video he made, look no further than his Twitter account:

I thought what was said in the Update of the article at Fortune Tech was spot on:

[T]he term “smartphone” is pretty much universally used to apply to the device Gingrich was holding up in the video. But he never once used that term, even if only to argue against its use, as he did with “cellphone” and “handheld computer.” That, in fact, is what makes the video so bizarre. If it were an argument that we shouldn’t use the word “smartphone,” nobody would be making fun of the video. Or if they did make fun, it would be because the battle has already been won: it was decided years ago that “smartphone” is the term, and everybody knows what it means.

Source: CNN

Ramblings of a digital writer: Do you believe in coincedence?

I almost agree with all of this. I believe yes — there are secrets being made. Yes — there are freedoms being taken away. And Yes — they are using fear to do it.

The only thing I part with is that these different instances in Benghazi, Newton, Boston, etc. aren’t set up by the government for political agendas, but rather are being used to get political agendas across — which is what upsets and angers me so much.

So the lesson from the original post is still valid: 1) educate yourself before what you just accept as fact from mainstream media outlets and corrupt politicians. 2) Hold on to and appreciate your rights and freedoms.

Not all politicians are bad — we must as America stand together as a people and apart from the government. And the government officials who want that, are likely going to be the ones that are right for this country.

bojandjordjevic:

What are Obama’s chances of power grab with these government organized massacres? How long before people realize that Benghazi, Newton, Boston and Louisiana are all government inside jobs?

Stop being a sheep, there are no coincidences with central power system that completely annihilates your 4th amendment rights by having total control over your communications and private information.

There are no secrets to them. How can you think that conspiracies don’t exist,yet you are living in one!?

This very government is using fear to put you in submission, while junk food companies are sedating you with added hormones. It’s yet another conspiracy theory, because more than 30% of population is fat, and incapable of running.

Do you think they will share happy meals in FEMA camps, or they will brand them that way? Whatever grinds your gears…

Stick to your guns my fellow Americans…

Expressing My Thoughts About Guns And Our Constitutional Rights

Alright. So after much debate in my head, I’m going to put this out there. I apologize if it’s something you find flawed. I’m not looking to offend, but rather to instigate rational and logical thought.

So, before you scream… consider what I have to say.

I often wonder why Obama (but not just him) is pro partial-birth abortion, but against “assault weapons” or even semi-automatic guns.

Here are some non-biased excerpts via Wikipedia of the following definitions:

Partial-Birth Abortion (Intact D&X surgery):

Once the cervix is sufficiently dilated, the doctor uses an ultrasound and forceps to grasp the fetus’s leg. The fetus is turned to a breech position, if necessary, and the doctor pulls one or both legs out of the cervix, which some refer to as ‘partial birth’ of the fetus. The doctor subsequently extracts the rest of the fetus, leaving only the head still inside the uterus.

Read more about intact dilation and extraction.

Assault Weapons:

Different types of firearms, and is a term that has differing meanings and usages.

In discussions about gun laws and gun politics in the United States, an assault weapon is most commonly defined as a semi-automatic firearm possessing certain features similar to those of military firearms. Semi-automatic firearms fire one bullet (round) each time the trigger is pulled. […] Most assault weapons are rifles, but some are pistols or shotguns.

Read more about assault weapons.

Semi-Automatic Firearms:

A weapon that performs all steps necessary to prepare the weapon to fire again after firing.

Read more about semi-automatic firearms.

Now my thoughts:

  1. Our President agrees with extracting a fetus that very well could have been born (yes, I realize there are exceptions, such as miscarriages), but disagrees with citizens owning guns because they kill children? (He’s using them as leverage for his anti-gun messages to America) Seems contradictory.

    “So, Aaron, you’re FOR killing children?!”

    No. I cannot even     fathom that. Or anyone for that matter. Don’t be absurd.

  2. I don’t like the term “assault weapons” because it over-hypes them to be some terrible thing. A pistol could be an “assault weapon”.

    Are we going to ban handguns too? According to FBI statistics, they are the number one kind of firearm used in crimes.

    If so, that means we, the American people, aren’t going to have anything to defend ourselves with, should we want to carry a firearm.

    Besides, do you really think criminals are just going to hand over their weapons? Seriously? Alright… I’m not even going to argue with you.

    And what about our illegal immigrant problem? We can’t even stop people (who are currently bringing drugs) from crossing the border illegally… what is to stop them from adding firearms to their list of imports?

    Also, assault weapon isn’t definitive. I feel like if the term is used in laws, the definition could be altered at any time to conform to future agendas by the Government.

  3. From now on, when talking about the “shootings,” stop calling them shootings, call them massacres.

  4. There is one true thing that governs our country: the constitution. So, I present to you the Second Amendment: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
    Read more about the Second Amendment

  5. In addition, there is one true thing that governs our lives (whether we like it or not): God. So, I present to you one of the Ten Commandments: “Thou shalt not kill.”

  6. Stop being motivated by fear and start being motivated by education, logic, morals, values and pure common sense.

    That is what we should base our lives and decisions on.

  7. Lastly, I’d like to share with you a couple videos:

Unconstitutional laws aren’t laws.

He couldn’t have had a better response!

In the end result, however, it’s not just about guns, abortion, marinara or [fill in the blank of a “controversial” topic]. Everything is encompassed under morals and values. Those are what truly define how each of us live our lives… and ultimately, our country’s history.

That said, we should expect terrible things to come. It’s sad, but it has been foretold in the bible. So although I just went on this huge long rant, we can be assured that things—bad things—will happen. And there’s only one whom we can trust. Again, whether you agree or disagree, I believe it’s true and nothing can, nor will, change that. There is an ever-growing movement to be “open” and “tolerant” in society. But we shouldn’t be open and tolerant to everything. We must stand for what is right.

If you feel compelled to comment, I welcome you to do so. But I will not respond to hateful comments. In fact, if able, I’ll delete them. If you choose to disagree, I can’t and won’t try to change that. But if this post has in some way opened your eyes and brought forth new thoughts, I would love to hear.

Thank you for reading and have a great day!

Thoughts on Minimum Wage

For an assignment tomorrow in my Critical Thinking class we had to write a paper about our thoughts on minimum wage. At first I didn’t have any opinion, but after doing some research things changed. Here are my thoughts:

In all honesty, I had never considered pros and cons of minimum wage until this assignment and overall, I  saw it as a good thing. That said, as I started to do some research, I realized my opinion may have changed from seeing it as a positive thing and I will explain why.

Those who support minimum wage claim that it promotes greater efficiency in a business. They also argue that it increases the living standards of employees and reduces poverty. However, how can minimum wage really reduce poverty or increase the standard of living? I truly believe it isn’t necessarily how much you make, but what you do with what you make. It is possible for “Jim”, who makes $40,000 a year, to be in the same financial position as “Mark”, who makes $15,000 a year. Depending on how Jim and Mark save their money, Mark might do very well for his level of income by saving his money and following his budgets, and Jim might not do well at all due to his spending habits. However, if Mark doesn’t have very good saving habits, he might be in a dire financial situation. Should that be the employer’s responsibility? What about the government’s? I tend to think not. Minimum wage is just another example of how we rely on the government to make our life for us, instead of going out and doing it ourselves. Professor Milton Friedman of Standford University said:

“If you look at the real problems of poverty and denial of freedom to people in this country, almost every single one of them is a result of government action…”

He mentioned the high unemployment rate of black teenagers calling it a “disgrace and a scandal.” He expands on this reasoning saying that they receive “lousy schooling through governmental schools,” making them unqualified to hold decent jobs. By having a minimum wage, employers are practically required to discriminate against them by not hiring them unless their productivity is enough to justify minimum wage. He also states that governmental welfare is a “machine for producing poor people.” These governmental practices are actually conducive to poverty instead of being the answer.

Minimum wage affects employers a lot too. To make a profit, they must raise prices. I don’t feel that employers should underpay employees by any means and with high living expenses it does make it difficult to make a living off so little. But maybe living expenses are high because we have such high demands for accommodations. These high demands are a result of little appreciation for what we work for. If we had to work harder for our money, we might spend and budget it wiser. Once again, it’s not the government’s role to do this for us. We have to. We must take accountability for our actions. So is minimum wage fair? No. Not for businesses as it inhibits them from keeping lower prices that consumers are willing to pay. What about the people? No, not us either. It cripples us from striving to accomplish something greater. Instead we settle for less because we’ll get paid enough or we may not even have the skills to justify being paid minimum wage in the first place.

Minimum wage shouldn’t be higher, but I doubt it will go lower. At best it should stay where it’s at. We’re in an age of “more, more, more,” not “less, less, less”. The argument could be made that the higher minimum wage is, the more employers have to raise their prices, thus the consumer having to pay more for products or services. Because the consumer must pay more, he or she must make more and because he or she must make more, the employer must raise the price of a product or service. It is a vicious circle. This proves that minimum wage is not the answer to financial problems. Instead parents, society, the department of education, etc. must teach children how to manage money, otherwise the financial woes of this country will continue to spiral down into an abyss.

What are your thoughts? Do you agree? Disagree?

Capitalism Vs. Socialism

Earlier this week I said to watch out for my thoughts on this topic… I never posted it that day. But here it is:

Capitalism: An economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth

Socialism: A theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. In Marxist theory, the stage following capitalism in transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

Reference: dictionary.reference.com

Personally, the economic system I prefer to be in is capitalism. I feel this way because it has proven its effectiveness much more in the United States and other countries that have adopted it versus socialism. Socialism is founded on principles that inhibit individualism, growth, entrepreneurship and even critical thinking of the people. In socialism the government tells the people what they want to do, how they want to live their lives and what to teach our children. A politically active blogger, Justen Charters, said it well:

You’re telling me that a rich guy who makes 500 trillion dollars a year shouldn’t share his 500 trillion dollars with everybody else?

He continued on to “defend” this socialistic thinking playing the part of someone justifying that they should receive part of the money because they paved the road that the rich guy drives his Bentley on. It was refreshing to see that someone else of my demographic had common sense, however, this socialistic attitude is very common in Americans today. Simply put, socialism is an example of “we the government-dependence” (entitlements and privileges over principles), while capitalism represents “we the people” (accountability and responsibility). Unfortunately socialism is being taught today to kids by their parents and the department of education. For example, valuing your privileges over your principles and to be politically correct instead of telling the truth, are what is being taught by society, parents and schools.

Capitalism ensures that the only thing we get a “cut” for is what we work for and we don’t get “free lunches”, but that what we do get are opportunities, if we strive for them.

hahaha ohhh I LOL’d actually more like COL’d (Chuckled Out Loud)





Note: apparently my Google Chrome dictionary sees “COL’d” as a word as it isn’t underlined and “LOL’d” is 

(via foxes-on-fire)

Source: naoebullying

MEGAUPLOAD IS DOWN!! Due to S.O.P.A (Original Anonymous - Operation Blackout, warning video)

This video is awesome! I agree 100% Well said.

Tennessee To Jail Social Media Users For "Emotionally Offensive" Images

You “should know” better, says Tennessee law makers. Possible sentences for the crime include a $2,500 fine and up to a year in the clink.

This is absolutely ridiculous! Politicians never stop amazing me with their ignorance and stupidity. As if we didn’t have enough lawsuits already. Why don’t we fill the jail cells with people that are actually costing lives, OR BETTER YET… use tax dollars to PREVENT those types of things from happening, NOT developing policies for people posting “hurtful images” on the web. Sigh.

Top