Political Correctness Truly Defined (Part 2)

I want to make something perfectly clear here. I do not feel that one’s political views should have any bearing on whether or not they are accepted as artists, writers, singers, etc…The trend in Hollywood has been for decades to embrace the far left and shut out anyone with any views that deviate from that view, even if the person trying to make a living is middle of the road.

There is a view among many in society that a comic should only entertain according to the point(s) of view that are personally acceptable to them. Artists in all camps do not accept this notion as it is a form of dictating their material, or in easier terms to understand, societal censorship.  Politicians have been subject to ridicule from both sides of the spectrum but it is only when someone who is in power on the left that the specter of censorship rears its ugly head.

There were proposed rule changes to the FCC about writers and reporters that did not get put into place because those rules interfere with the first amendment and since the media is largely “owned” anyhow, it was a waste of taxpayer funds to make such rules. If the people of the United States wanted government controlled media, they’d start moving elsewhere.

Reporters, if they have any sense of ethics, should be reporting the story truthfully, without interjecting what they think should happen as a result of the evolving stories coming into place. The people do not need a journalist to help them make up their minds. They have a sense of what they feel is right and what they feel is wrong.  In fact, if anything, viewers should find any reporter that takes it upon himself/herself to try to change their views on any issue to be insulting. That is not their job. If they want to get preached at by anyone, they will turn off the television and go to church. The audience, for the most part, wants the story–without how  the person reporting “feels” about it.

Both the media and Hollywood have worked very hard to be the self-appointed moral compass of this nation and that is the last thing they should be. Individuals can decide the course of their own destinies without their advice. For the most part if they are not paid to entertain, they are paid to inform. Personally, unless I’m watching the news or PBS, I do not want to hear about political topics. I go to movies to escape these things. I go to concerts to escape these things. When those in these fields try to tell me I should have point of view A rather , point of view B, I tend to get rather angry.

I do realize that some acts in general ARE politically motivated and write their music accordingly. If the fans want that, that is their decision. Those acts are doing what they think is their “mission” in life which is to bring awareness. There is nothing wrong with that.  The same holds true for writers who make it known what the purpose is for script A or script B. However if it’s not on a topic that has my interest, I won’t go or watch the show.  However that is NOT the job of the journalist and they need to get back to reporting the news and stop giving 3 minutes of story and 30 minutes of editorializing.

When writers insert politics into a script with what otherwise would be a very good drama that isn’t pushing their views, I change the channel. I do not want to watch a TV sitcom and hear about how good Obamacare is. That is not why I watch TV. Thank God the Brits aren’t doing that crap. However getting money from grants to do so is an incentive. I’m sure if the GOP had done that, the left would be screaming bloody murder about taxpayer funds going toward that. Well I would also, but it is because taxpayer funds shouldn’t be going to pay for advertising government programs and campaigning on mainstream TV shows on MY DIME.

We have a 17 trillion-dollar deficit and that is the last thing government money should be going to…Common sense should dictate as much.

As for Hollywood, they should have followed Clint Eastwood’s example when he hired both Tim Robbins and Sean Penn to be in “Mystic River”. He hired objectively and their political views didn’t make a bit of difference. He hired them on the merits of their talent.  Remember Matt McConaughey’s Oscar acceptance speech and how Hollywood cringed? I hate to burst their bubble that speech was indicative of a more “new age” view than anything, which many there embrace.  Hollywood, by exhibiting such bias, is alienating  the movie going audience. As they continue to lose more at the box office due to this and the rising prices of tickets, they should bear in mind that if they cannot be open to viewers of all factions, this trend will continue.

That being said, if anyone is open to the idea of opening up an Independent movie studio in TX, I know of a place that is for sale in a desert location that would make an excellent spot due to it’s historical significance alone–for a cool $2.9 million bucks and you’d better snatch it up before a certain studio in California decides to do so (if they get the idea)! I just had to throw that in, but have a great day!

Political Correctness Truly Defined (My Not So Humble Opinion)…

Political correctness is the art of forcing a society to conform to a set of norms for a segment of the population that cannot deal with the normal processes of changing from a teenager into an adult. It is not about racism. That is a separate issue. It is not about misogyny. That is also a separate issue. It is also not about silencing religious views, which is still another issue.  However those pushing to monitor and control free speech are combining these issues in order to kill three birds with one stone so that they can live in a world that is only big enough for them to thrive on.

To be politically correct is to not have your own opinions on an issue that are not in agreement  with those who are writing the playbook. They will certainly be censored or omitted altogether. Your creativity will be subject to censorship and ridicule should you offend someone who is nothing more than a panty waist who cannot deal with the fact that not everyone will agree with their views.

It does not make the politically incorrect cowardly or dastardly when the opposition pushes this, it reveals those pushing it off on society as persecutors of those who espouse the U.S. Constitution.  In essence, those who push the “PC Movement” are cowards themselves. They fear what they hear rather than deal with the reality that they should be looking at.

The people should be setting the course for this nation–and I do not mean those in Hollywood. I mean the people as a whole. I also do not mean the powers that be. Why? Because all I have seen recently is failure and disappointment with their actions–or the lack of them.

 

 

As for me I’m with Voltaire on the issue: “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”

Voltaire

 

 

The Power of the Discretionary Veto & Why Rosemary Lehmberg Should Have Resigned

Has anyone ever heard of this? I have…I learned it in Government 101 class when I was in college. When a public official has veto power, whether it is the President of the United States or the Governor of any of the 50 states, it means that he or she can veto any bill before him/her, or any bill with funding in it at his/her discretion for any reason. Period.  That should be the end of the story but it is not.

Before I go any further, watch the entire video. It’s long but I feel it important to tell the story from start to finish:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndYMqTqNeuE

This is the entire video surrounding the story of Rosemary Lehmberg. If you do not know WHO she is, you will soon enough. She is the District Attorney of Travis County, TX.  This is the same public official who would like to be trusted with taxpayer funding to run a “public integrity” unit. As you see in the video, she has no integrity.  Why would anyone trust her with taxpayer funding after the acts seen on this video?

This is why she indicted Rick Perry. He doesn’t trust her–and he shouldn’t.

Now back to the power of the governmental veto. As I have stated, I have always been taught that this is discretionary. The president (regardless of party) and countless governors have vetoed laws and funding for many reasons at their own discretion. This is true whether the item in question is attached to other items on a bill that the voters do not want passed into law, or (as in this case) there is a question as to the integrity of the official about how the funding is to be used when such funding is requested.  After watching the video of the arrest, I would strongly question her ability to run an “integrity unit”.

As a public official, she is responsible for the for prosecution DUI cases.  Her arrest will, without a doubt, cause many of the DUI cases prosecuted by this office to come under judicial review if it can be proven that she was too lenient  in her prosecution of them.  Family members of victims can have this investigated. This is especially true of a case where she failed to get an order to seize the passport of a young lady named Evelyn Mezzich. If you have Facebook, you can read about that case here:

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Justice-for-Lindsay-Brashier-Extradite-Evelyn-Mezzich-from-Peru/134878483190277

That entire debacle could have been prevented if she had simply gone to a judge and asked for an order to seize her passport since she was a flight risk and a death was involved. As a result, Ms. Mezzich escaped to Peru. She cannot be prosecuted because the current treaty with Peru was not in place until later. Ms. Lehmberg was grossly negligent in her prosecution of this particular case.  As a result, there has been no justice for Lindsay Brashier, who lost her life far too soon…

That being said, I wonder how many other cases were botched by this office?  The assistant DA was also busted for DUI…I’m wondering if any of those cases will be reviewed being that Ms. Lehmberg obviously feels that driving drunk is not that big of a deal. I know where I stand on it–she should not be in office. Too many people get killed by people, who like her, are stupid enough to get behind the wheel while they are drinking.

Now back to my point, which is this:  This woman made a mess of the office to which she was elected by her outrageous public behavior and she has misused her own office to attempt to rewrite the laws of the State of Texas. This indictment is not only outside of the realm of law, it is an abuse of her own power as a District Attorney–something for which she should have her license to practice law revoked.  The way she conducted herself at the time of her arrest should have least brought that issue up since she threatened the arresting authorities after being taken to jail.

Needless to say, Judge Jeanine Pirro  called this one right.  Here is what she had to say about it:

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/08/17/%E2%80%98pure-unadulterated-hogwash%E2%80%99-judge-jeanine-slams-indictment-rick-perry

It doesn’t matter if one likes or hates FOX news, this woman is right on the money when it comes to this issue.  Rick Perry was well within his rights on this matter, and therefore, I support him on the issue. Special thanks to those who shared the Pirro link with me. I was impressed!