A REPLY TO NOVADEMOCRAT

Donald Trump FULL SPEECH – Rally in Ashburn, Virginia – August 2, 2016


Here of late we have had several commenters visiting CITIZENTOM.COM to tell us what an awful person Donald Trump is. Is Trump so awful? Filtered through the news media, I guess he is.  Do you trust the news media? Then listen to him talk. Look at the video above. Go to his web site. Care enough about our country to find out for yourself.

What is below? That’s my reply to Novademocrat (See his comment here).

😉

@Novademocrat

There is not much point in taking you too seriously. You don’t want to be taken too seriously. So I went to http://www.urbandictionary.com to find a definition of multiculturalism for you.

Multiculturalism is a marxist ideology designed to ethnically cleanse European derived peoples by promoting the massive 3rd world invasion of Europe, United States, Canada, and Australia.

Multiculturalism leads to racial tension and may erupt into a racial conflict once the racial spoils system breaks down. For example – multiculturalism is in full swing in California. Blacks and Hispanics are engaged in a violent racial struggle in Los Angeles (from here)

Here is a more serious definition from dictionary.com.

The view that the various cultures in a society merit equal respect and scholarly interest. It became a significant force in American society in the 1970s and 1980s as African-Americans, Latinos, and other ethnic groups explored their own history. (from here)

The notion that all the various cultures in society merit equal respect is nonsense. People merit respect, but some of the things we believe?

Our Constitution is worthy of respect is worthy of respect because of the ideas upon which it is based. Freedom of religion is still not commonplace. Even where it is allowed, freedom of religion is always in peril. Most people don’t believe in freedom of religion. They believe in their religion. That’s why freedom of religion is in peril in this country.

Here is the latest problem in our country. If someone says Christianity is better, Multiculturalists will call them bigoted. That is silly, but Multiculturalism is both silly and dangerously serious. Multiculturalists believe all religious beliefs deserve equal respect. The only way for that to be true is to believe we all worship the same God. That is an absurd religious belief. Unfortunately, because of our education system and our mass media, quite a few people in the United States think everyone worships the same God, somehow, some way.

As a Christian, I believe Jesus is the Son of God, and the Bible is His Word. Why would a Christian have any reason to respect another religion as much as he respects Christianity? That would not be reasonable or logical.

What Christianity teaches us to do is to love our neighbors and give them the Good News. Christians are not suppose to respect other people’s religions. We are suppose to respect other people. If we don’t agree with the beliefs of other people, we don’t make fun of them or hate them. We just hope our devotion to Jesus sets a good example.

Why mention Communism, Nazism, Libertarianism, or even Secularism as religious ideologies? Every form of government is based upon a religious belief. That is why we all make certain assumptions about the religious beliefs of Communists, Nazis, Libertarians, Secularists, Republicans, Democrats, Conservatives, Liberals, and so forth. Are those assumptions always correct? Every individual varies from the mean, some more so than others. Nevertheless, people decide how they will live based upon their notions about the purpose of life, that is, their beliefs about God. Any government that exists in conflict with the religious beliefs of the people it rules is inherently unstable. That’s why every government, including our own, seeks to indoctrinate the People via the education system and the mass media. Rather than adapt to the desires of those they rule, the rulers would much rather change the desires of the people.

Trump has challenged those who rule us. So those who rule us are using the mass media to condemn him. Naturally, they are employing the state religion, Multiculturalism, to label him as politically incorrect. To survive the assault and win the election, Trump must  convince us that unlike his opponent, H. Clinton, he is willing adapt his rule to the beliefs of the people. He has to convince us he want to lead us, not manipulate us.

Can Trump convince us? I don’t know. I just think we need to make certain we check out the man for ourselves. He is certainly right about one thing. We cannot trust the news media. We have to check him out for ourselves.

WHO IS KHIZR KHAN?

deceiveWhen politicians speak or even their close supporters speak, we have to consider the possibility of deception. Hence, Khizer Khan little speech at the Democratic National Convention should have raised our suspicions. So when I saw Hillary’s DNC ‘Khan’ Job at That Mr. G Guy’s Blog, I decided to take a looksee. Since that post was interesting, but a bit hard to believe, I looked around.

Is there a backstory about Khizr Khan and Donald Trump? (www.americanthinker.com) adopts a more moderate tone, essentially pointing out the degree to which Khan overstated his charge.

Clinton Cash: Khizr Khan’s Deep Legal, Financial Connections to Saudi Arabia, Hillary’s Clinton Foundation Tie Terror, Immigration, Email Scandals Together (www.breitbart.com) observes that Khan is not just any gold star father.

Khizr Khan Has Written Extensively On Sharia Law (dailycaller.com) suggests Khan has religious motivations most Americans would find disagreeable. Nonetheless, the LBGT communities representatives to the Democratic Party’s national convention probably still cheered for Khan. Suicidal, I guess.

I suppose what is most damning about Khan is what this article points out, Khan specializes in visa programs accused of selling U.S. citizenship (www.washingtonexaminer.com). He has an obvious business interest in opposing Donald Trump’s candidacy.

When Khan spoke at the convention, it appears he used the death of his son for his own gain. That’s hardly admirable, and we should shame the news media and the politicians who have attacked Donald Trump. They should have known better.

Hillary’s DNC ‘Khan’ Job at That Mr. G Guy’s Blog may hard to believe, but it is pretty much true.

OF TWISTED WORDS => LANGUAGE TO DIVIDE AND TO CONQUER

President Barack Obama delivers a statement on Ukraine in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House, March 6, 2014. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)
President Barack Obama delivering a statement in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House, March 6, 2014. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Unlike the previous posts in this series, here we will consider a technique instead of the abuse of a particular word. Here we will consider how loaded words divide us. We will begin by defining the expression, “loaded words”.  Then we will discuss some examples of how loaded words are being used. Finally, we will consider how some people are dividing us by so corrupting the language that every word we use is becoming loaded.

Defining The Expression

Let’s begin by defining the expression “loaded words”. Here is a straightforward definition from Yahoo! Answers.

What are “Loaded Words”?

Loaded words are words (or phrases) which have strong emotional overtones or connotations and which evoke strongly positive (or negative) reactions beyond their literal meaning.

Examples:
Unloaded Loaded
Plant Weed
Animal Beast

While few words have no evaluative overtones, “plant” is a primarily descriptive term. “Weed”, in contrast, has essentially the same descriptive meaning as “plant”, but a negative evaluative meaning, as well. A weed is a plant of which we disapprove.

The Fallacy Files provides examples of fallacious reasoning.  That includes the post Loaded Words. Here is the crux of it.

Loaded language is a subfallacy of Begging the Question, because to use loaded language fallaciously is to assume an evaluation that has not been proved, thereby failing to fulfill the burden of proof. For this reason, Jeremy Bentham dubbed this fallacy “Question-Begging Epithets”.

In other words, with loaded words we give our judgement of a person, a place, an animal, a vegetable or a thing. If we use a loaded word just to concisely state an opinion (Crabgrass is a weed.), that is an appropriate usage. On the other hand, if we use a loaded word to “win” an argument, that’s not logical. Sometimes it is utterly comical.

Peacock_terms (from here)
Peacock_terms (from here)

Arguments With And Over Words

Politics, sales, and life itself revolves around persuading others to accept our judgement. If we can get the other to accept and to adopt our language — to use the same loaded words we use — logical or not we win the argument. Hence the importance of loaded words.

Here is a clear and unambiguous example, Does it matter if Obama uses the term ‘Islamic terrorism’? The expression “Islamic terrorism” suggests that Islam is part of the problem the problem of terrorism. Hence Donald Trump, who endorses the phrase, wants to stop immigration from Islamic nations, and Barack Obama, who will not concede that Islam is part of the problem, refuses to use the phrase “Islamic terrorism”.

So it is that when we debate issues, we carefully use loaded words. That includes labeling ourselves and each other. In addition, we label our work and the things we produce. Consider.

  • Trying to associate themselves with our nation’s founders, Democrats use to call themselves Liberal. Then, after they had fouled term “Liberal”, they started calling themselves “Progressives”. What’s next? This article, Democratic voters increasingly embrace the ‘liberal’ label – especially whites, Millennials and postgrads, demonstrates how short our memories can be.
  • Some Atheists try to associate themselves with the word “reason”.  Hence some Atheists rallied under the banner of Reason.
  • This one is kind of funny.  RationalWiki.org has a prominent post that defines Loaded language. Given the title of their website, they should know.
  • Here in Loaded Words we have a discussion of how we should label Dylann Storm Roof, the man who walked into a church in Charleston, South Carolina and murdered nine black parishioners.
  • Here in Loaded Words we have a discussion of the problems scientists have naming a new biotechnology or biomedical process.

    The terms that scientists and researchers select to name a new biotechnology or biomedical process can impact the public’s perception of the advance and willingness to consider its potential clinical utility. Terms such as “cloning” or “gene editing” are not ethically neutral. In fact, while the use of these terms may be provocative and increase readership of news stories and even articles in peer-reviewed journals, such value-laden names may directly impact the ethical acceptability of new technologies as well as government policies related to these innovations. (continued here)

Identity Politics

In a free society, we each have the right to do as we wish so long as we do not infringe upon the rights of others. That is, if it is not illegal, you and I can do it. Thus, in a free country we can pursue our own definition of happiness, but we cannot force others either to participate in or to condone our actions. In fact, others have the right to disapprove of our behavior. Therefore, if we defy social conventions or customs, those who disapprove can subject us to various forms of censure including ostracism and shaming. Generally, the people of a healthy community discourage antisocial behavior primarily by enforcing local customs. Because it is costly and inflexible, legal action is usually the last resort.

Unfortunately, communities sometimes abuse their social powers. Therefore, the Federal Government has stepped in to “fix things”. So our once relatively healthy society is suffering an epidemic of identity politics. That is, instead of treating all people equally before the law, government leaders now think it is their job to provide  “special” constituencies “special” protection.  How does that involve loaded words?

  • We regularly hear our leaders using a slew of loaded words we associate with identity politics: discrimination, bigotry, profiling, hate crime, favoritism, civil rights, affirmative action, equal treatment, harassment, and so forth.
  • We regularly hear our leaders glorify identity politics with loaded words: diversity, multiculturalism, tolerance, rainbow, social justice, healing, and so forth.
  • Nobody wants to be seen as intolerant.
  • Everyone, especially businesses, are afraid of being sued.
  • We make a Federal case out of everything.
  • We have way too many lawyers and numerous other people using identity politics as their cash cow.
  • We cannot think objectively, especially when our identity is involved.

So it is that in the name of diversity, we do some strange things. Here is a personal example. Years ago I wrote Reviling Christian Fundamentalism. What that post explains is how and why I discriminated against Christians.  Thanks to indoctrination with the load words “Jesus freak”, I had bigoted opinion of Christians Fundamentalists.

Here is something more recent (what inspired this post). This past week I watched an exchange between two female bloggers. First LeeLee wrote Of Course Women Are Objects, and insanitybytes22 responded with “Women as Objects?” Trying to explain herself,  then wrote Aftercare. In comments on each others blogs, and debated fiercely, but — why?

Neither nor argued women should be treated as sex objects. Instead, they argued over whether people are objects. Since resolving their dispute is not germane to this post, I have no interest in taking sides. What I want my readers to observe is that the loaded words “sex object” are so powerful that these loaded words prevented the ladies from participating in a worthwhile discussion.

Some call our era the Information Age, but Propaganda Age seems more accurate. Thanks to a proliferation of twisted words, we have more and more trouble understanding each other.

Relief For The Disconnected: Conclusion

What do loaded words like “Jesus freak” and “sex object” do? Either they push us apart, or they express just how disconnected we are.

Dictionary.com defines people as objects. Even my 1956 edition of Funk & Wagnalls’ New Practical Standard Dictionary of the English Language suggests human beings are objects. Yet as objects we each stand alone. As objects we see only from our own point of view. As objects we know only of our own needs.

In this Propaganda Age, words storm and rage. Words toss us about. We drift apart and collide violently. Our flesh is too weak; it has no power to resist.

John 6:63 New King James Version (NKJV)

63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.

The Bible, the Word of God, speaks to our spirit, the spirit within our flesh. Thus, the Bible anchors us. When storms of words disquiet our souls, we need to turn to our Lord and His Word.

——————–

For more posts in this series please see OF TWISTED WORDS => FEMINISM.

IT IS ALL TRUE, BUT IT IS STILL A LIE?

newsThe Washington Post is not my favorite paper. I don’t buy it any more.  However, when a commenter (here) left a link to this article, Trump supporters’ false claim that Trump U judge is a member of a pro-immigrant group, I had to chuckle. In spite of title of the article, the content of the article proves that Trump supporters claim that the Trump U judge is a member of a pro-immigrant group is altogether true.

The standard politician avoids tagging anyone except white guys as racists. Supposedly, only white guys can be racists. That proposition is, of course, racist, but the almighty news media enforces it ruthlessly. Why? The Democratic Party wants to use the government to reward its supporters based upon race. In fact, the Democratic Party wants to use the government to reward its supporters based upon race (non-white), sex (female), gender preference (anything except straight), religion (secular or non-Christian),  disability (disabled), age (old and greedy or young and gullible), wealth (poor or filthy rich), and so forth. Therefore, the Democrats seem bent upon transforming America into a third world country. The world has an abundance of poor non-white people, and their votes are cheaply bought.

You think that is absurd claim? Then consider that Washington Post article carefully. That article affirms that the Trump U judge is a member of a race conscious organization that awarded a scholarship to an illegal alien. Yet it accuses the people who say that of being liars. The Washington Post reports the facts and then seeks to explain them all away. Here are a couple of examples.

  • “La Raza” which means “The Race” is supposedly an innocuous expression Latinos use to describe themselves. Really? Try googling the term before the controversy over the Trump U judge. Here is a handy link, “la raza”.  And don’t forget the obvious. When whites start organizing based upon racial identity, everyone calls it evil. Other than skin color, what is the difference?
  • When the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association Scholarship Fund gave a scholarship to an illegal immigrant applicant they did not know the student was here illegally. Their excuse? They did not ask. Since California is a sanctuary state, we really have no idea how many illegal immigrants the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association Scholarship Fund provided scholarships. One could be a low estimate.

Do Liberal Democrat news media outfits care about the truth, or do they care about  winning on their issues?  Consider again the fact California is a sanctuary state and why.  It is about power. Think about the fact that judge is an Obama appointee. Does anybody seriously believe Obama is going to let the Constitution get between him and what he wants. The Constitution has not stopped Obama with respect to illegal immigration. Would it stop his appointees?

The Constitution has not stopped the Democrats in California with respect to illegal immigration. California is a sanctuary state. Yet Obama and those Democrat politicians in California swore an oath to uphold the Constitution. Does The Washington Post have any interest in holding them accountable? No.

So what should we make of The Washington Post award of Four Pinocchios? Hypocrites!