Originally posted 2010-12-12 21:34:46. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

by Nancy Morgan
RightBias.com
December 12, 2010

In other words, millions of Americans have willingly allowed themselves to be placed in the losing position of continually being forced to prove a negative. “I’m not a racist,” “I’m not homophobic,” “I’m not a greedy capitalist”…ad nauseum.

Political correctness is a hugely successful campaign that has effectively altered traditional standards of behavior in order to advance the political agenda of mostly left-leaning groups. From gay rights, to feminism to open borders, PC rules dictate that you conform with the prevailing group-think at the risk of social ostracism.

The amazing thing about PC is that no-one has yet fought back against the complete idiocy and transparent manipulation that is its very essence.

Until now.

I have decided to quit enabling useful idiots by continuing to mouth the politically correct group thoughts that threaten to snuff out opposing opinions under the guise of tolerance and compassion. I never voted for these idiotic rules. I never agreed to them. And I refuse to abide by them.

I will not let others dictate manners to me. I was brought up to be respectful of others and to live by the Golden Rule. In other words, I have good manners. So why should I allow others to impose their “manners” on me? Especially when their “manners” only apply to favored groups.

Conservative women can be called whores, and the Virgin Mary can be covered in dung and called art, but God forbid anyone acknowledge that many blacks have willingly let themselves be enslaved to the government entitlement system. Or that some people will always be poor because they are just plain stupid and lazy – and subsidizing them with my tax dollars only encourages more stupid and lazy behavior. The majority of them have chosen to rely on others for their existence – but that doesn’t mean I must grant them “oppressed” status.

Acquiescing to political correctness only serves to enable it. And I will no longer enable arbitrary rules whose main goals serve only to contradict traditional values and undermine American and individual exceptionalism.

Here are a few basic facts. America is the greatest country the world has ever known. We have equality of opportunity, not outcome. Respect must be earned, not granted, and promoting self-esteem is just a subtle message that it’s OK and even desirable to be selfish.

Most politically correct “elites” who purport to speak for you have been educated way beyond their intelligence. Life isn’t fair and everyone is not equal. If any of your “rights” are paid for by others, they not rights, they are entitlements. And redefining words to make them politically correct does not change the underlying reality. A rose is a rose and a jerk is a jerk.

Shakespeare once said, “There is no right or wrong, only the definition that makes it so.” I have decided that I will no longer allow politically correct idiots with a vested agenda to define my words for me. I am not willing to adopt someone else’s definition of right and wrong at the expense of my own.

With a black man in the White House, I have also decided that I will no longer lower my voice when discussing race. And since I graduated from high school long ago, I’ve decided that I will never refer to words by their first letter. Those that refer to “the n word” or “the p word” are  people who have willingly allowed others to set the rules. They are sheep who have acquiesced to group-think in a vain attempt to appear “with-it.”

From now on, I will call a lie a lie, not a misstatement. Just because many people lie does not make it right. And I will not allow my opinions to be called judgments. I will not allow debate to be redefined as argument, and I most certainly will not have anyone tell me that my point of view is invalid unless they can prove it.

Instead, I will do as Thomas Sowell does when faced with politically correct statements made by self-righteous busy bodies. I will ask myself these four questions that will determine the validity of any statement:

1. At what cost?
2. Compared to what?
3. According to whom?
4. What hard evidence do you have?

By Sowell’s standard, pretty much every politically correct statement and/or idea doesn’t pass this simple test. All the main shibboleths of the left are shown to be lacking in both substance and foundation if put to this test. But political correctness demands that you not question crucial assumptions for fear of being branded stupid. How stupid is that?

If you’re content to allow others to define you, by all means, keep playing by the politically correct rules. If you’re OK with allowing others to manipulate your sentiments to achieve their own agendas, feel free.

If, however, you value individual freedom and common sense over group-think, maybe it’s time you joined me in starting to fight back against all this PC nonsense. It’s easy. Just say no.

Related articles

• Political Correctness In American Policy (samuelatgilgal.wordpress.com)
• Sunday Stats: Is America Too Politically Correct? (delamagente.wordpress.com)
• A Politically Incorrect Defense of Political Correctness (bluelinchpin.wordpress.com)
• Indiana Man Selling “Racist Soaps” Doesn’t Have Time For “You Politically Correct People” [Video] (deadspin.com)
• Offensive Political Correctness (socyberty.com)
• Political Correctness and the Thought Police (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
• SCOTT JOHNSON: Revolt Against The TSA: “The TSA It is bound by a form of political correctness tha… (pajamasmedia.com)
• Has The World Become Too Politically Correct? (socyberty.com)
• Bill O’Reilly Knows Why Americans Are Fed Up: Too Much Political Correctness (mediaite.com)

Originally posted 2009-10-07 21:50:24. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

by Nancy Morgan

Related articles by Zemanta

• A Government Bailout for the Media? (usnews.com)
• Has political ideology finally gone too far? (blue-dot-blues.blogspot.com)
• 100 charged in US and Egypt over phishing scam (telegraph.co.uk)
• Judge to Rule on Bail in Taping of ESPN’s Andrews (abcnews.go.com)
• F.B.I. Arrests Dozens for ‘Phishing’ ID Theft Scheme (nytimes.com)
• This Saturday: Jonathan Gold’s Union Station Cocktail Party – A Cocktailian Gathering of the Shakerati (laist.com)

Originally posted 2010-02-16 22:09:34. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

by Nancy Morgan
RightBias.com
February 12, 2010

In the UK last September, a 12 year-old boy turned up at school as a girl. Over the summer holidays his parents changed his name to a female one and allowed him to don female garb and wear his hair in pigtails. The youngster is now preparing to undergo hormone treatment and surgery – and could become the world’s youngest sex-swap patient in the coming years. His school has graciously provided him/her a separate toilet and changing room.

Here in the U.S., the IRS ruled earlier this month that a Massachusetts woman should be allowed to deduct the costs of her sex-change operation. And in Portland, Oregon, there is a move afoot to have the city pay for the sex-change operations of any employees that decide they are unhappy with their gender.

Hollywood is firmly on board, as they plan a new film about the world’s first post-operative transsexual, starring heavyweights Nicole Kidman and Gwyneth Paltrow.

Over in Italy, the first prison for transsexuals is now open for business.

These cases represent the tip of the iceburg in the growing movement to make gender optional. When coupled with increasingly successful campaign to legitimize same sex unions via gay marriage, the result is an all out assault on the centuries old concepts of family and marriage.

Consider: On September 4, 1969, California Governor Ronald Reagan signed into law the nation’s first no-fault divorce law. California legislators made the case for no-fault divorce with the valid argument that no-fault divorce would remedy some very desperate situations. A woman who desired a family married to a man in an insane asylum, for example. Who wouldn’t want to make her case an exception? Who wouldn’t allow this woman legal divorce from a marriage that had ceased functioning? No-fault divorce was enacted to address these untenable situations. It was intended to address the exception, but instead, quickly became the rule.

No-fault divorce quickly spread across the United States. By 1985, all states had enacted no-fault divorce legislation except for New York. This policy, enacted in good faith, weakened the concept of family to the point where divorce is now the norm, not the exception.

A case can be made that the push to redefine gender roles and broaden marriage to include gays also has the potential of becoming the new norm. And while the very few legitimate cases of genuine gender confusion are indeed heart wrenching, the re-structuring of our society to accommodate them will very likely result in the destruction of traditional family and marriage.

Traditional families are the bedrock upon which our culture and society are based. And marriage is the glue that binds these families together. With twin assaults from the left on these institutions, America is facing the very real possibility of a radical reformation. A reformation that is based on the needs of a few at the expense of the majority. A reformation that has the potential to destroy two of America’s most basic and trusted institutions.

The left is unrelenting in its desire to redefine society. Billing themselves as champions of the oppressed, the left has made significant progress in labeling anyone who disagrees with their agenda as being motivated by hate and ignorance. Genuine objections based on faith, history, common sense and morality are ignored as the left focuses the debate on the plight of the ‘victim.’ It is a successful, proven political strategy. After all, as David Horowitz points out, “The appeal to help the underdog and defend the victims resonates with all Americans.”

The left has attained the moral high ground in this cultural battle. And they will continue to maintain it as long as the focus is on the supposed ‘victims’ and not on some very basic questions that are being left out of the equation. Namely: At what cost?

Do the feelings of the minority of gays and transsexuals trump the rights of the majority of heterosexuals? Do the feelings of 6 year-old Joseph Romero, oops, Josie Romero warrant blurring the gender roles of all citizens? Do the desires of gay couples to attain social legitimacy warrant the destruction through redefinition of the centuries old tradition of marriage? And finally, who will pay the very real costs when these social experiments fail?

These are questions that need to be addressed before the left succeeds in fashioning their brave new world. A world that caters to the feelings of the few at the expense of everyone else. A world where fealty to God and family would be replaced by political correctness and transient social experiments. A world where traditional family and marriage are considered moot and America turns into one country under men instead of God.

Pandora’s Box has been opened. It remains to be seen if we can close it. Drip, drip, drip.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Article published with the author’s permission

Related articles by Zemanta

• Latest test for church, state (timesunion.com)
• Divorce Rate Higher in States that Ban Gay Marriage (politicalwire.com)
• Gwyneth Paltrow Joins Nicole Kidman in ‘The Danish Girl’ (cinematical.com)
• 12 Reasons Why Gay Marriage Should Be Illegal (thisrand.com)
• Quote of the Day: Ted Olson on “The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage” (themoderatevoice.com)

Originally posted 2010-06-01 21:31:16. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

by Nancy Morgan
RightBias.com
June 1, 2010

The contuing love affair the left has with Barack Obama bears a striking similarity to my short-lived marriage with my now ex-husband.
 
Like Obama, my ex-husband, who I’ll call Sam (not his real name) was a blank slate upon whom I projected all my hopes and dreams. Only in hind-sight did I realize that my perceptions and expectations were a product of my own imagination, with little connection to reality.
 
Obama burst onto the national scene out of no-where. Millions of Americans naturally assumed that a man running for the highest office in the land had undergone the necessary vetting and was of high character. Since Obama had the official approval of the media, he was accepted, without question or investigation, by fully half of all Americans.
 
Likewise, I accepted without question that Sam was worthy of both my trust and respect. Being a judge, I assumed Sam had been vetted and been found worthy. He had society’s approval, having been given the right to add "The Honorable" to his name. I accepted Sam’s label as fact, without question. And counted myself lucky to have found a man of such high character.
 
During the course of our marriage, I was loath to acknowledge any facts that were at variance with the image I constructed of Sam. (Just as millions of Obama voters still do.) I had invested my hopes and dreams, trust and respect into this image, and any facts to the contrary were ignored. Even when Sam started showing signs of ‘The God Complex’ and began abusing the trust of his judicial office.
 
On one occasion, Sam awarded $500,000 in a case that he had previously informed me was worth only $50,000. When I asked him why, Sam said, "Because L… asked me to." L… was the plaintiff’s lawyer and Sam’s good buddy.
 
On one level, I knew Sam was wrong to do this. I was then faced with a choice of having my dreams shattered by an ugly reality or continuing to fool myself. I opted to compartmentalize. As in, ignore any evidence that didn’t accord with my earlier perceptions.
 
I had made Sam into a white knight, a hero, a man I could respect. To maintain that illusion, I routinely started ignoring the increasing indicators that maybe I had been wrong to do so. I ignored the growing disconnect between his words and his actions. I just couldn’t bear to have my dreams shattered. Much like the many devotees of Obama whose carefully constructed image of Obama would be shattered if they acknowledged Obama’s many imperfections, that are just now becoming apparent.

Very few men remain unchanged when given power over other men. When everyone laughs at all your jokes, pretty soon you convince yourself you are pretty funny. When surrounded 24/7 by yes men and the trappings of power, its only natural to start thinking you’re superior to others, that the rules that govern ordinary men don’t apply. This happened to Sam, just as it is happening to Obama.
 
It is true that power corrupts most men. It was also true, in my case, that Sam’s increased arrogance and his flouting of the law became secondary to my need to maintain my illusions. To admit that Sam was a mere mortal, a flawed mortal, was unthinkable. What did that say about me? That would mean that I was pretty stupid. That would mean acknowledging my naivete and gullibility. I chose not to do that.
 
After three years of marriage, Sam tired of me. With 20/20 hindsight, I realize he did me a favor, but that didn’t lessen the pain of divorce. It took another five years before I was able to admit and accept that Sam had never been worthy of my respect. I realized that my love for him was based more on my need to see the world the way I envisioned it instead of the way it really was.
 
I only hope it doesn’t take that long for Obama’s supporters to realize the same thing. Granted, reality is painful, but in today’s dangerous world, illusions are a luxury America can ill afford.
 

Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for conservative news site RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Article published with the author’s permission

Recommended related reading:

Alter Regrets ‘We Didn’t Show Up’ for Obama
G.O.P. Sees a Way to Revive Healthcare Debate
Obama’s Approval Drops, Despite Gestures
Obama, the Thin-Skinned President
MARK TAPSCOTT: Will journalists wake up in time?

Originally posted 2010-05-25 22:12:11. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

by Nancy Morgan
RightBias.com
May 24, 2010

As Congress labored furiously to ensure that women have equal access to federal bathrooms, insurgents in Afghanistan this month launched a series of bold strikes on U.S. and NATO bases in Afghanistan. The Potty Parity Act is proceeding apace.
 
The Obama administration’s response to the upsurge in violence in Afghanistan? They launched an investigation into allegations that a number of American soldiers were responsible for the "unlawful deaths" of at least three Afghan civilians. This, despite the recent unanimous acquittal of three heroic Navy SEALS who were swiftly exonerated by a jury after being accused of, gasp, slapping one of the most dangerous terrorist detainees in the world. Who, by the way, the SEALS heroically captured. Thank-you, Navy SEALS. No update yet on the terrorist’s hurt lip.
 
As our young men are fighting and dying in Afghanistan, our current elected officials remain hard at work. Their most recent work product includes a proposal for a new medal to reward our troops for "courageous restraint." You got that? A medal for not killing the enemy. Of course most of these medals would, of necessity, be awarded posthumously.  

Maybe by the time the first new medal is awarded, the "enemy" will actually be defined. The only concrete message so far from Washington, via Attorney General Eric Holder, is that the enemy is NOT radical Islamic terrorists. Whew!
 
The month of May could very well be likened to a chapter out of Alice in Wonderland. As oil from the BP catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico continued gushing into the ocean (day 36 and counting), the Obama administration was otherwise occupied – holding a gala State dinner for Mexican President Calderone. A good time was had by all, although extensive media reports suggested that one of the guests had a dress quite similar to Michelle’s.
 
To be absolutely fair, Obama did appoint a commission to study how to deal with the BP catastrophe. Just because Obama is the largest recipient of BP campaign cash for the last twenty years doesn’t mean he’s in their pocket. No word yet on when or if the commission will release its expert findings.
 
Meanwhile, Obama blithely continued to side with foreign countries against the U.S., as he bravely spoke truth to power, teaming up with President Calderone to condemn the newly passed immigration law in Arizona. Although the Arizona law mirrors federal law, thanks to Obama’s TelePrompTer and a derelict media, millions of Americans now believe that upholding the Constitution is racist. And I guess its now OK for foreign leaders to criticize America from the White House lawn.
 
Also this month: Unfazed by the 368 point plunge in the stock market, which occurred the same day the Senate passed a financial regulation bill, Obama took to the airwaves to announce an executive mandate. Bypassing Congress, Obama unilaterally declared tougher, expanded fuel emission standards for cars and trucks. Damn the economy, Mother Earth is more important. Right?
 
As world stocks tumbled, Obama responded by granting unions expanded power, making it easier for airline and railroad workers to unionize. That unions are one of the reasons behind this year’s economic meltdown was left unreported.
 
As Bangkok was being burned by deadbeats protesting cuts in social spending, Congress remained totally focused on a slew of new and expanded social spending measures, costing a mere $200 billion. They hope to get it to Obama for his approval in the next three weeks, well before those pesky November elections.
 
Congress appeared unfazed by a new NATO report that identified Iran as a "Major Article 5 Threat." They were otherwise engaged crafting a formal apology to American Indian tribes for "ill conceived policies" and acts of violence committed by them."
 
As North Korea threatened war and sent 50,000 troops to the border, the House remained busy passing a beer resolution. House Resolution 1297 officially supports "the goals and ideals of American Beer Craft Week." North Korea and American alcoholics rejoiced.
 
As the new jobs numbers came out showing another "unexpected" increase in the jobless rate, the Democrats were busy crafting another $190 billion raid on taxpayers under the guise of a "jobs bill." That their last "jobs bill" exacerbated the jobless problem didn’t deter them.
 
As the world hurtles towards the edge of the cliff, the United States remains focused on the really important things. AG Andrew Cuomo was successful in forcing clothing retailers to hire transgenders. And Sen. Robert Menendez is busy urging the Major League Baseball Players Assoc.to boycott Arizona.
 
And let’s not forget the states. California, which is one step away from going bankrupt, was busy passing a bill that would require "diversity" in California pension plans. The very same pension plans that will soon put taxpayers on the hook for millions.
 
I could go on, but I’m starting to scare myself. This article is not fiction. Nor is it satire. It is a recap of the month of May in this, our United States.

Is it just me, or is something seriously out of whack in our country?