Student Debt Cancellation

This Student Debt Cancellation move is a disgrace to the constitution, our morals, and fiscal responsibilities.
1) Government should provide for the general welfare and defence; this is far too specific
2) Not everyone has student loans
3) Not everyone who has student loans is able to participate
4) A man handles his own responsibilities #StrongDadJune. Get to work!!!

Let's Go Brandon!!!

Strong Dads

It is Strong Dad June! Fatherhood is my most important vocation. Nothing comes close to the importance of and fulfillment from my duties as a father to my children. Nothing.

https://www.youtube.com/@thestrongdadprotocol is the source. From what I can tell, he was the creator of the idea of Strong Dad June. We give entire months for nonsense - complete garbage. We have 1 day for the highest calling a man can serve: fatherhood. This defect is now resolved.

So, what is a Strong Dad? Please, go look at the YouTube linked above. Learn what these men have to say and what they are doing. Take what you can use and apply it to your life; leave the rest. As men, it is up to us to drive our families toward success. Part of success is study; study successful people and take their habits to make your own.

To me, a strong dad sets achievable goals and then executes them. A strong dad does not execute flawlessly - no human can - a strong dad, calls his mistakes, takes criticism as constructive, grows, adapts, and succeeds. This is especially true when it comes to family and children. Full stop.

If you are a man, try to be a strong dad to someone. If you have your own children for whom you are responsible, the choice is clear. If you do not have your own children, you can still be a strong dad. It is up to us to grow the next generation. 80% of the men in prison grew up without a father. Fathers are important.

You don’t have to be a giant for someone to gain an edge by standing on your shoulders.

Liberty is Hard

It is extremely difficult to be your own person; your own family; your own community. Extremely difficult. This is why we have a lot of arguments around what small government is, what constitutional conservatism is, and what balance to strike between liberty and safety.

Liberty is a huge Responsibility. If we were to live under completely totalitarian rule, we would have everything determined and provided that we could have. We would have no choices and no responsibilities; all would be provided and determined by those who did the choosing. this of course would not work because, different people are different, it would be impossible to find happiness (or even pursue it) under such a regime.

If we were to live under complete freedom there would be a lack of protection for society’s most vulnerable and marginalized: elderly, infirm, mentally incapacitated. Without some set of rules, one evil person could harm others freely and it would be up to those others to protect themselves individually. Clearly, we need some kind of medium between extremes.

Our founders understood liberty and the balance a people can strike with their government to maintain both liberty and safety. The government would be of for and by the people. The government would be balanced between duly elected parts. The government would be given powers only that the people said it would be given and no other powers. the government would exist to secure the people’s rights as provided by Nature and Nature’s God. The government did not give rights to the people; it simply secured them. Simple.

This method of governance requires a great deal of personal responsibility and comes along with a great deal of liberty. In effect, we can do as we please as long as another is unharmed in so doing. If another is harmed in our doing, the people’s government redresses the situation. Simple.

Of course, there are people who would rather not take responsibility: People who are strong, healthy, and of sound mind who do not take responsibility for themselves, their own families, and their own communities. The universal basic income, ultra-high minimum wage, anti-capitalist bunch. rather than relentlessly dedicating themselves to personal betterment, they would (at the expense of their own liberties) have the government control everything, take from those who have, and redistribute to those who have not. This is what “tax the wealthy” means: the government ought to steal from workers and give it to the lazy. This, of course, only works absent a certain amount of liberty. Our property rights must be tossed aside to provide for those who would rather not earn things.

Absent liberty, responsibility disappears. It is hard to maintain a culture of liberation; destitution is always but one generation away.

The 2nd is Supreme

I have seen a great many so-called Conservatives supporting this Hunter Biden conviction. Poppycock.

The 2nd Amendment comes with no asterisks. It comes without error. It bears burden of neither interpretation nor hardship. It is clear. It shall not be infringed. The Hunter Biden conviction is an infringement.

The most devastating piece of this ruling is a simple clerical error on a form can cause Federal prosecution. A single mis-checked item is grounds for a Federal Prosecution. If the Department of Justice so decided, it could pull hundreds of millions of these forms and dig for errors. This is a clear case of the DoJ being granted the authority to shop for crimes rather than finding a crime and shopping for perpetrators. This is turning the system on its head. Hallie Biden stole and then illegally disposed of a firearm, where are her charges?

The authorities found a gun. It is unsafe to dispose of a gun by throwing it into the trash, this is unquestionable. Like dangerous chemicals, guns should be disposed of properly of course. How did the person who performed this act walk free? All Hunter did was buy a gun and keep it; why was he prosecuted while the person who unsafely discarded the gun was not? This is a clear attempt to create a precedent to go after legal gun holders for doing nothing. This is a power grab by the system and nothing less.

A true, Republican, Constitutional Conservative will denounce this prosecution, trial, and conviction. Full stop. We need to use this as one measure by which we judge our candidates. We need to vet our candidates wholly. Nothing less is acceptable.

Hiring the Convicted

There are so many posts going around stating if it is OK to hire a convicted felon for President, it is OK to hire a convicted felon for any position. This is true. If it took you the conviction of a privileged, high-status man to come to this realization, you are part of the problem.

I have worked with, worked for, supervised, and hired people with criminal records. In fact, if there are two resumes before me, one with a conviction and the other without, all other things being equal, I will pick the felon. In my experience, felons work harder. It is that simple to me. Which one of these people can I trust - without knowing them fully - to do the job better? The felon wins.

When I was a youth and without status or reputation, I took odd jobs to make ends meet. One of them was in a warehouse and brought me into contact with all manner of person: robbers, assailants, murderers, illegals. These people worked the hardest I have ever seen anyone work. They had lived inside the system (in a 20 sqft cell) and were determined to never become dependent upon that system again; it fueled them, and they were successful.

One of the hardest working people I know - one of the people I would entrust ANY task to because I know it would get done if accepted - was tried, convicted, and punished. I would trust this man with the keys to the kingdom because, I know he would do right by me. All of the snakes in the grass, all of the slimy sales types, all of the say-it-behind-my-back, all of the petty people I know have no criminal record outside parking and speeding tickets.

These are the facts of my life. Maybe other people have different experiences, but these are mine. Don’t judge a book by its cover, and don’t judge a person by his rap sheet.

Children with Guns

This is a good thing. I take my children to the range often. They learn rifle and handgun. They love to shoot especially on steel targets; the ding really gets them fired up!

We have children’s dirt bikes. We have children’s swimming. We have children’s beauty pageants. We have children’s crossbow. We have children’s anything and everything in America because, in America, a parent gets to direct and rule the life of a child. The Government does not rule, it merely governs as indicated by its name. The Government does not come into the family. The family is sovereign.

This is one of the salient points made by our founders. They set for us a Governmental system that made parents and families stronger than Government. This is why they located men who abandoned their families and put them to use in workhouses; a practice that we (in my opinion) should bring back. It is not just a parent’s right to raise his own family without interference, it is a parent’s duty to do so.

I shoot at the range; therefore, my children shoot at the range. It is part of our culture. It is part of our life. You handle your family as you see fit, I will handle mine. We read. We write. We shoot. There is nothing wrong with that.