Our Entitled Elders

As people get older, we learn that no one has all the answers. If we are the fortunate ones, we learn that it is ok – and sometimes better – to admit that one does not know everything. This concept also applies to our elders and parents. I would argue the point that most parents are right most of the time, but there is the grim and primitive world mind set that still infects the minds of our older generations. Racism, sexism, nationalism, and theocracy are among the out-dated points we had to wrestle out of the older generations. But there is an additional mindset that continues to surface when the older people in our community begin to lose an argument – “entitled”

Naive older folks love to think millennials are entitled and selfish – and some are. A lot are, actually – but what a useless and pedantic thing to say. It begins to become dangerous as the older citizens use this to begin to hate younger generations. I have been witnessing this phenomenon from afar until recently, a member of my own family shared an illogical and all too perfect example of this generational hatred.

The title of the article is creatively named Your kids should not be the most important in the family by John Rosemond. This decrepit grouch is your typical old man. As if running outside to get the neighborhood children off his lawn, he begins his article with a conversation about a new millennial family. He began by asking them, “who are the most important members of your family?” The young couple responded “our kids!” – the first mistake when speaking to anyone over 65. Rosemond, being a loving man asks, “Why? What is it about your kids that gives them that status?” He then neglects to include their answer – instead claiming that they tried to “fumble with appeals to emotion” before he responded, “There is no reasonable thing that gives your children that status”.

It is almost funny – if it wasn’t so real – that Mr. Rosemond claims that millennials and their children are entitled and selfish, and yet he claims that it is his generation that is the most important. So important that they should be treated as special citizens – ones who should be listened to no matter what just because of their age. In reality, it is Mr. Rosemond is the entitled and selfish generation.

We will never know what that poor couple said. They were probably letting the poor old man rant about the evils of children – but Rosemond shows a hidden and telling characteristic of part of our elder’s generation: kids were not important. Now, if you think the millennial couple he talked to gave bad reasoning, then his is even more nonsensical. For starter, the children would not be alive if it weren’t for the parents. So the fact that children cannot provide for themselves, they are second class citizens. He even refers to children as second-class citizens. Rosemond continues to use the same line of reasoning to prove his point. It is the parents that provide food and clothing  therefor children are not as important. To Rosemond and other like-minded neanderthals, to say, “‘Our child is the most important person in our family’ is the first step toward raising a child who feels entitled. You don’t want that. Unbeknownst to your child, he doesn’t need that. And neither does America”. You can just hear your own outdated grandfather ranting at Thanksgiving about the young people – but it is more than just that – it is about raising free open-minded children.

This utilitarian perspective is long outdated, but it still lives on through the generation that has been subjected to being treated like second class citizens. Children were meant to be seen and not heard. They did not have an equal say. Luckily, we have sense evolved our minds past this truly primitive hierarchy. We know now that children need attention, education, and communication. To Rosemond, children are a leech on the household (I suppose his children were ill-behaved) but we now know that children are the future. To invest in the future, we must invest in our youth. Soon, these old ignorant fools will die off and we will be that much more free from their illogical ranting. But until then, we must remember to focus on our children and not on those like Mr. Rosemond – in 50 years, who do you think will be more influential?

I will leave you with an appropriate quote to live by -rather than treating our children unequally like literal “second-class citizens” we must teach them to think. because if they are raised as thinkers, we will have less brain-rot in our future.

“When you want to teach children to think, you begin by treating them seriously when they are little, giving them responsibilities, talking to them candidly, providing privacy and solitude for them, and making them readers and thinkers of significant thoughts from the beginning. That’s if you want to teach them to think.” -Bertrand Russell



Article referred to is included below:



Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings

It has happened again. Poor Thomas Jefferson is under fire – the enemy? Credulity and malicious suspicion. The rumor, of course, is the infamous Sally Hemings case in which Jefferson is accused of romantic affairs and/ or rape of the young slave Miss Hemings. I have addressed this rumor before – it made national headlines but was quickly debunked as being unprovable at best. And yet, some people still love bringing this back up and continue to put forth zero evidence.

This time, the article I could not leave alone is from consortiumnews.com in which Robert Perry attempts to label Thomas Jefferson as a rapist –  the reason for attacking one of our more intelligent and open-minded presidents remains unknown. Mr. Perry begins his argument in a somewhat repulsive way, “Jefferson apologists raised finicky demands for conclusive proof of the liaison, as if it were absurd to envision that a relatively young man then in his mid-40s, a widower since his wife died in 1782, would have initiated a sexual relationship with an African-American female, even an attractive light-skinned mulatto like Hemings” almost as if Perry expects anyone to want to abuse Miss. Hemings.

The most important sentence in this page-long conspiracy accurately describes the whole Jefferson-Sally Hemings case

Though it’s true that unequivocal evidence does not exist…

If I had the honor of Mr.Perry reading this post – or any Jeffersonian conspirator, I would ask them to please read that slower: “evidence does not exist”.

The article could have stopped there! In fact, I would argue that if any idea, assertion, or story was not found in any evidence, it is a mute point. A good weapon to use in an argument lacing any facts is to say, “Anything asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”. As to this case, consider it dismissed.


The Snowden Dilemma

In somewhat of a daze, my wife and I left the theater after watching the movie Snowden. I was quite happy with the movie. It did not seem too bias one way or another and it provided a pleasant story for those who do not keep up with politics or world news. I could not wait to get in the car and start picking my wife’s mind about the issues the movie brought up – only to get stopped by one of those mall venders who pester you to buy something or try some invention of theirs. He got my attention by standing in front of our path and asking, “What movie did you see?” Slightly put off by his action to stop us, I tried to walk around him and muttered, “Snowden”.


As most people are when they hear the word Snowden, he was taken aback and asked, “I hear the movie was biased and make him out to be a hero. I think he should be hung – he is responsible for American deaths! What do you think?” I was clearly not wanting to talk to the man – and his question isn’t something that can be answered right there in the middle of a mall – but his clear ignorance of the issues warranted my response. Plus, there are many people who don’t clearly know what Snowden did, or the outcome of his actions, or what should be done with him. the Snowden case will undoubtedly go down as a historical and moral questions that will decide the direction of our nation.


Edward Snowden was an extreamly capable and intelligent student. He excelled in his career and was considered a computer wizard at the CIA making him highly desired. Although Snowden loved working at the CIA, he quickly began seeing dubious actions in their international affairs. For example, at his first diplomatic mission in Geneva, he witnessed the CIA successfully bribe the Geneva police and judiciary. Although he did not report this, the whole mission left Snowden uneasy.


Later in his career, Snowden began working at the NSA’s Hawaii Regional operations center where he was a system administrator – technically an “Infrastructure Analyst” where he would look for new ways to break into the internet and telephone traffic. This is where Snowden had a problem with his job: although his job was directed at China and North Korea, he witnessed the government using back-door methods of entry into electronic devices of U.S. Citizens and keeping that data unlawfully. Snowden did actually try to express his concerns to officials multiple times – but was warned not to say anything. Snowden has said

The NSA has records—they have copies of emails right now to their Office of General Counsel, to their oversight and compliance folks from me raising concerns about the NSA’s interpretations of its legal authorities. I had raised these complaints not just officially in writing through email, but to my supervisors, to my colleagues, in more than one office. I did it in Fort Meade. I did it in Hawaii. And many, many of these individuals were shocked by these programs. They had never seen them themselves. And the ones who had, went, “You know, you’re right. … But if you say something about this, they’re going to destroy you”

It would seem that the same whistle blowing standards the government holds to corporations does not apply to the NSA. Stuck in a rut, Snowden took drastic actions looking to change the course of surveillance. May 20 2013, Snowden arrived in Hong Kong in a leave of absence to meet with Guardian reporters to leak the information – which was over 1.5 million files. He finally left his hotel room and sneaked through security to board a plane to Russia which was then to take him to Ecuador to live with Wikileak founder Julian Assange. Snowden had had a ticket to Havana, Cuba but did not board his flight saying later in an interview, “I was ticketed for onward travel via Havana—a planeload of reporters documented the seat I was supposed to be in—but the State Department decided they wanted me in Moscow, and cancelled my passport.” Snowden assumed the reason they wanted him in Moscow was to label him a Russian spy. He is still in Moscow today waiting for another place to find asylum.

The idea that Snowden is a Russian spy and released information that has had Americans killed is not found in fact. And the recent election of Donald Trump has made the situation much more clear. Fox News and NBC has heard reports that Russian officials have found that Snowden has no more value to the government and could be a useful bargaining chip for Putin to cozy up to Trump. As a response, Snowden tweeted:

Finally: irrefutable evidence that I never cooperated with Russian intel. No country trades away spies, as the rest would fear they’re next.

A very clear observation. In fact, the Ecuadorian government is feeling the same way about Assange whilst he released Clinton’s emails in the 2016 election. Could this be the end of Wikileaks and whistle-blowing? That lies with the world leaders. No doubt, as long as Snowden has asylum, he will be safe – it is the transportation that is dangerous for him. But one must ask – what would the world be like it the world governments’ secrets cannot be held up to the light? This will be a pivotal question our generation has to answer.

The Tea Party is not Libertarian

The term “Libertarian” made its debut onto the political scene through an unfortunate way. It was during the early Obama years that the infamous Tea Party made its appearance with peaceful, yet angry protests against the Obama administration. The Tea Party, hoping to create ties to the revolutionary Boston Tea party event has done anything but. They are conservative, pro-government, and religiously bias – a horrible way to commemorate the secular founding fathers. And yet, the Tea Party persisted libertarian roots and not only tarnished our founding father’s ideals, but also the very name “Libertarian” is linked to the evangelical conservative movement.


In a recent study by the PRRI, a conservative Christian political group, only a mere 10% claim to be Libertarians within the Tea Party – where 52% identify as the Christian Right with the remainder belonging to the “conservative” group. But the differences between the Tea Party and Libertarian base lies a huge and impassable hole of ideological differences. For example, issues like abortion, physician assisted suicide, legalization of marijuana, and gay marriage presents issues between Tea Partiers and Libertarians – one that can not be reconciled. The biggest difference, to me, is the religious ideals between the Tea Party and the Libertarians. Libertarians, famous for the rights of man, prefer no religious bias be tied into government, where the Tea Partiers overwhelmingly promote religion in the government, schools and in daily life – a huge error to the founding fathers and libertarians alike. So how can libertarians and Tea Partiers differ on such huge issues and still be lumped in together?


The protests, featuring aging seniors sanding around with signs, seems to have made a possibly conscious connection to Libertarians. While, yes, the Tea Party is anti-government, they are anti-one kind of government: Obama’s government and while Libertarians can agree on hedging back government power – it is for completely different reasons. The Tea Party goal is to attack the Obama’s administration for the sake of reactionary conservatism – where as the Libertarians seem to keep their focus purely on the rights of man. The Tea Party is nothing but what is now considered the alt-right: Ultra Conservative, evangelical, reactionaries.


Everything Wrong with Jeff Sessions

Jeff Sessions just started his Senate hearing to become the Attorney General under President Elect Donald Trump. Because of this, his past found it’s way into the spot light of the nation making him largely infamous. Much of this political history is hard to research and decipher in the face of fake news and the mainstream media – so let me outline for you everything that is wrong with Jeff Sessions.

Sessions is currently a senator from Alabama and certainly acts like it. In a humorous yet dark way, he acts as if it is still 1850. His career is stained with various racial and controversial quotes and give the voter a peek into his actual beliefs. These heinous acts all start in 1986 when Ronald Reagan nominated Sessions to be a judge in the southern district of Alabama. Although the majority of Alabama’s inner circle supported him, many did not. Especially when the Department of Justice reveled some racially offensive remarks such as calling the NAACP and American Civil Liberties Union “Un-American” and “Communist-inspired”. Sessions went on to say that the NAACP was trying to force civil rights “down the throats of the people”. Friends of Sessions like civil rights lawyer Gerald Herbert, explained that he does not consider Sessions a racists, but, “has a tendency sometimes to just say something, and I believe these comments were along that vein.” A kind remark considering Sessions that white civil right attorneys are a “disgrace to his race”

Now, after reading this incident, I though that was the worst Session can be. Maybe I am a bit naive when dealing with racists.  But there is no “worst” of Sessions. He continues to surprise us when Attorney Thomas Figures asked Sessions what he thought of the Ku Kluk Klan to which Sessions responded that he thought they were, “Ok until I found out they smoked pot”. Sessions later said that was a joke – and if so, he would fit nicely in the Trump administration. They seem to have the same kind of humor. With Trump’s humor and Joe Biden’s foot-in-mouth moments, Sessions would be an entertaining character – as well as a dangerous one.

Recently, Sessions explained that he was pro-legal immigration. Not a bad position. But, as he is prone to do, Sessions ruined that when he explained why he is pro-legal immigration. “Legal immigration is the primary source of low-wage immigration into the United States…What we need now is immigration moderation: slowing the pace of new arrivals so that wages can rise, welfare rolls can shrink and the forces of assimilation can knit us all more closely together.” Well, as long as we need low-wage immigration, trust Sessions to be all for it. Let us not ponder too long about what would happen if we do not need low-wage workers or what he means by low-wage.

Now, perhaps the worst part about Sessions is his anti-science approach to global warming. I recall I once said you can judge a person’s mental capacity by how they interpret or believe in science. In 2015, Sessions was questioning the EPA’s Gina McCarthy saying, “Carbon pollution is CO2, and that’s really not a pollutant; that’s a plant food, and it doesn’t harm anybody except that it might include temperature increases.” Mind numbing


Russian Hack Investigation

Former Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton seems to want to end her biggest run of her life with the biggest lie of her life. Mrs. Clinton started with an attack towards rival Donald Trump alleging that he is spreading conspiracy theories and smearing our election process (which is true) – but now she is claiming that her shady emails where leaked by Russia. She came up with this theory quickly after the emails were leaked – making the election all the more juicy. The biggest let down from this whole conspiracy is that we, the voter, have never heard any proof. Even the electoral college members wanted a briefing before they voted, and received none. So is there any truth behind the Russian Conspiracy?

Lets recap. Beginning in the Democratic Primaries, emails from the Democratic National Committee and Clinton were leaked to Wikileaks. The topics of the emails are dark, and shady ranging from racist comments to actually conspiring against Bernie Sanders to ensure Clinton’s victory. Even though the emails were legit, Hillary and the DNC cried fowl. So it seems that you can be corrupt and vindictive as long as it is in an email.

Fast forward past Clinton’s and Trump’s victory and more emails are released revealing the sinister workings of the Democratic party. And just as Trump can do anything without blame, Clinton avoided any blame for her emails because she alleged that the Russians hacked her – no mention of her private email server where anyone could probably hacked and no mention of the possibility that a DNC staffer or a Bernie supporter might have leaked the emails (Imagine that person watching the news as everyone thinks Russia leaked the emails). No, Clinton went straight to a Cold War era conspiracy – and now everyone is buying into it without any sort of evidence. No one seemed to make much noise over the claim until Hillary actually lost – then half the country, including President Obama and government agencies started investigating.

Now, imagine for a moment: half the country, the White House, and the FBI and CIA are trying to find proof – and trying to bar Trump from the White House. If this sort of power found evidence of Russian hackers, wouldn’t it benefit them and be a huge moral responsibility to notify us? What are they waiting for? Just recently, the CIA director John Brennan reported, “Earlier this week, I met separately with FBI [Director] James Comey and DNI Jim Clapper, and there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election” Both directors and agencies refused to comment on that report. But is there a better time to come our and stop Trump than today? Today is that last chance with the Electoral College voting.

Not only did the Electoral College voter beg for a briefing on the Russian investigation, but Trump, and Wikileaks, and Russia, and half of America is begging for some sort of evidence. Wikileaks even offered to host the evidence, “Obama should submit any Putin documents to Wikileaks to be authenticated to our standards if he wants them to be seen as credible” Russian Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said it was, “indecent of the United States to groundlessly accuse Russia of intervention in the US election campaign” Mr. Peskov continues, “They should either stop talking about that or produce some proof at last. Otherwise it all begins to look unseemly”

Yes, there seems to be some friendship between Trump and Putin – but Trump has dozens of other foreign friendships just as capable to hack into emails. And yes, there is no doubt Putin would rather have Trump in the White House than Clinton. But that has no bearing on if the claim is true. I, and any reasonable reader want to know what really happened. Maybe someone needs to hack their emails to figure what is going on in our own country. Any claim asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence – and I hope we see some evidence soon.

Now, I am posting this as my last post of the year as I take an hiatus over the holidays. So if it comes out that Russia really did hack the DNC emails – I will be the first to admit that. But keep in mind, whoever hacked the emails, Clinton and the DNC still said all those things. They really conspired against members of their own party. They still betrayed and miss presented their own voters. And Clinton still challenged our election system without revealing her proof.

be on the look out for one of two possibilities: it is proven that Russia has hacked our election, or Clinton is a liar. If the trend proves consistent – it is far more likely to be the later of the two.