To Think or NOT to Think                                             6-25-2017

                    I imagine we can all agree that thinking is vital to a safe, healthy, and productive life.  Not your average, run-of-the-mill , automatic thinking that just naturally occurs, but deep, deliberate thinking.

                     We all under-use our magnificent brains with the exception of some rare individuals like Einstein and Tesla and the inventors, innovators, authors, etc. that are household names. The reason these people ARE familiar to us is because they were THINKERS, people who used their intelligence and creativity to make the world a better place.

                      Some of us, myself included, tend to over-think from time to time, and that too has its pluses and minuses. Still, I prefer to over-think than to not think at all, or to allow the government and media to do my thinking FOR  me.  Sadly, this is a terrifying reality for the Millennial generation.  It's not just calculators anymore, it is computers, Smart Phones, Self-Driving cars,  GPS, and so on and so on that have eliminated the NEED to think. 

                      Oppressive laws, mandates, rules, and codes suppress curiosity and free thinking and in some cases, we are punished for trying to do those very things. Shouldn't we be encouraged  to be creative thinkers? Apparently not. Our children are now taught WHAT to think instead of HOW to think. Hate Speech laws and pretend racism have strangled our right and will to have opinions and to voice those opinions without fear of reprisal.

                        Today, government is expected to address our societal issues, regulate our faith, influence our political views, our morality, and even our goals and dreams. The Left DEMANDS that government be their Mommy and intervene in disagreements such as Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice, Traditional Marriage vs. Same-Sex Marriage, and to regulate alleged "Offensive" words that might hurt a Liberal's tender feelings !  The Left wants the government to regulate EVERYTHING they don't like and tell us what flags we can or cannot fly on our own properties, what statues and religious symbols can be publicly displayed, what art, music, or books are acceptable, etc., etc. Still believe you are FREE?

                        We are at a crossroads in history, and the routes available to us are not leading to any light at the end of the tunnel. When thought and speech begin to be regulated and even controlled by the government, your freedom is in immediate peril and you need to do some SERIOUS thinking, and then ACT.  It isn't easy to avoid the incessant indoctrination methods of politicians, media, and schools and universities, so how do we separate Truth and Reality from Lies and Propaganda? 

                        Why is it that media goes ballistic in reporting every lethal encounter between law enforcement and Black males, but they never, ever mention the solid statistics like those I've posted below? There is an Agenda, that's WHY. There is ALWAYS an Agenda, and we must learn to THINK before we REACT.  Be curious, be skeptical, and use that amazing brain you were born with. Be brave enough to doubt what you hear and to voice those doubts! 

                        A very interesting example is an article that was sent to me yesterday that had many people on the verge of strokes. The piece claimed that two 55-gallon drums had been accidently unearthed during a landscaping project at the Clintons' Chappaqua,NY home.  One of the drums was reported to contain 50 pair of womens' shoes, all brand-new and still bearing their original price tags. The second drum allegedly contained the body parts of three females, soaking in a liquid preservative.

                         The discovery was kept under wraps until police could complete their preliminary investigation, and the release stated that the body parts had been identified as belonging to three teenage girls that had gone missing in the mid-1970s. Where had they last been seen alive? In Bill Clinton's home town in Arkansas. You can understand why this story caused such panic and shock, especially since it was very well-written and offered incriminating evidence. Was it TRUE?  Of course not. Even Bill Clinton isn't dumb enough to kill three girls back in Arkansas and drag their bodies with him from home to home. 

                          Someone who reacts before they think, would believe every word of that article and be sharing it on Facebook in seconds. By allowing  emotions to control reactions and behaviors rather than using thought and research, we have gone down a dangerous path in recent years, and Liberals and Millenials ALWAYS respond to life emotionally rather than thoughtfully. ALWAYS. It is a symptom of retarded maturity and cultural dependency.

                          Yesterday, the Eckhardts, Bob, and I stopped in at the Larabees' 70th Anniversary celebration. The turnout was terrific and the very first thing I noticed was that I knew everyone that was there! I saw folks I haven't seen since the old diner burned down, and I was literally overcome with a sense of nostalgia that was absolutely uplifting. It was like going back in time to when New Lebanon was a community of country people who had been around the area for decades, before the invasion of Liberals from the cities, before the division of Right vs. Left and the forced Environmental crap and froo-froo eateries. Before so many residents were strangers. 

                           I talked with Mrs. Larabee about this, and she agreed 100%, as did all the other people I talked to about it. It was like attending a family reunion !   Sue said that the reason her family had instituted the Community Picnic was to try to bring people together and to familiarize ourselves with the newcomers, but that had been lost due to interference from other entities. Very sad.  Once upon a time not very long ago, a local family could host a community picnic at the public park and accept food and paper-good donations from anyone that wished to give, without  STUPID RULES regulating what MIGHT be illegal about it. Who gives a crap if some town or state MANDATE says we can't do it, it's OUR TOWN, OUR PEOPLE, and we should just DO it!  See? That's what is wrong in America today, over-regulation, apathy, and fear of government. Tell them to go sh_t in a hat and have the damn picnic. 

                          Smoking bans in the park? Be considerate enough to not smoke near the kids, but refuse to be controlled any other way in any other outdoor area.  Be FREE. Resist the Liberal oppression and bully tactics, THINK for yourselves and exercise your rights, teach your kids to THINK, RESEARCH, and defend their freedom. The Larabee party was a breath of fresh air for those of us who remember a Liberal-Free New Lebanon and a simpler America. Those of us who THINK, had a wonderful time.


Our Dangerous Drift from Reason

by ANDREW C. MCCARTHY September 24, 2016 4:00 AM 

Media distortion of ‘officer involved’ police shootings has consequences. In a time when “narrative” has supplanted factual reporting, Fox’s Bret Baier’s evening news program is usually an oasis in the desert. So I winced when he asserted, amid Thursday’s report on the deadly Charlotte rioting — euphemized by the media as “unrest” and “protest” – that blacks are significantly more likely than whites to be killed by police. It echoed the distortion peddled by the Chicago Tribune in July, when “officer involved” shootings in Minnesota and Louisiana led not merely to “unrest” but to a massacre of cops in Dallas. African Americans, the paper claims, are two and a half times more likely than Caucasian Americans to be killed by police. Are they really? The Trib says so, but only after adjustments are made for the marked population difference between the two races. But wait a second: If there is so plainly a bounty on black men – if the chances that a young African American will be killed in a police encounter are so uniquely high that our cities are in upheaval, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division is on permanent alert, and black parents nationwide feel compelled to have “the talk” with their kids – then why is statistical fiddling necessary to portray this crisis? Because there isn’t a crisis – unless we’re talking about one that is wholly manufactured. The exceedingly inconvenient fact of the matter for the “cops are preying on black men” narrative is that far more whites than blacks are killed in confrontations with police. Last year, in fact, it was roughly twice as many. The social justice warriors can’t have that, of course. So, making like Olympic judges from the old Soviet bloc they so resemble, today’s narrative repairmen knead the numbers to make the story come out right. The spin becomes “fact,” dutifully repeated in press coverage and popular discussion. In this instance, the hocus-pocus is to factor in that, although there are 160 million more whites than blacks in the country, this 62 percent portion of our population accounts for “only” about half of “police involved” fatalities (49 percent). Blacks, by contrast account for an outsize 24 percent of the deaths despite being only 13 percent of population. The premise of this exercise is ludicrous. By and large, police are having lethal interactions not with the nation’s total population but with its criminal population. The elephant in the room, the fundamental to which we must never refer, is propensity toward criminality. It is simply a fact that blacks, and particularly young black men, engage in lawless conduct, very much including violent conduct, at rates (by percentage of population) significantly higher than do other racial or ethnic groups. This is not a matter of conjecture. Crime gets reported by victims; the police don’t invent it, they investigate it. Overwhelmingly, the victims of black crime are black people. Indeed, as Heather Mac Donald relates in her essential book, The War on Cops, only 4 percent of black homicide victims are killed in police interactions. If African-American parents were really having “the talk” that is pertinent to protecting their children, it would have to involve the reality that those children are overwhelmingly more likely to be shot by other black youths. The police are having “police involved” confrontations with young black men largely because black communities demand police protection — and understandably so. What would happen if police were to default from their duty to serve and protect — the position demagogues are increasingly pressuring cops into. Then, naturally, we would hear the alternative “narrative”: that American society had abandoned its most oppressed communities to a dystopia of crime, poverty, drug abuse, and hopelessness — and don’t you dare mention who is doing the oppressing. To brand the cops as villains regardless of whether they are active or passive is play-acting, not problem-solving. To brand the cops as villains regardless of whether they are active or passive is play-acting, not problem-solving. There’s another infuriating thing about the “cops preying on black men” narrative fed us nightly on the news and daily on the campus. There used to be, if not truth, at least a certain coherence to it: The story line, consistent with a racialized fable, was that white cops are preying on black men. But the narrative won’t hold. In too many “police involved” incidents, such as the tragic one in Charlotte this week, the involved police are themselves black. So just as “global warming” had to become “climate change” to adjust for, you know, reality, the cops in our narrative have been “whited out,” as it were. Sadly, this legerdemain has been a boon for the narrative. Now the story is that racism is institutionally ingrained. It is not an individual cop’s race that matters. It is that the profession of policing itself is, to hear the head of the Obama Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division tell it, an enduring symbol of slavery and Jim Crow. Presto: The African-American cop is no longer a change agent moving us toward a better, more integrated, more harmonious society. When he dons the blue uniform, he is just another perpetuator of a hate legacy. And thus, the real-life fallout of our increasingly perverse, race-obsessed narrative is that all cops become targets. The supplanting of fact by “narrative” — in race relations, in our politics, in our assessment of national-security threats, in our foreign policy — has become such a fad that we are at the mindless point of skipping past what it portends. It is all well and good — even necessary — to find thematic ways to express truth, to teach its lessons. “All that glitters is not gold,” for example, is a theme, not a narrative. It is a transcendent bit of fact-based wisdom that allows us to navigate the world as we actually experience it. A narrative, to the contrary, is an excuse for avoiding reality and acting against our best interests. The most consequential organization in radical Islam is the Muslim Brotherhood. Laying the groundwork for its American network, the Brotherhood gave pride of place to an intellectual enterprise, the International Institute of Islamic Thought. The IIIT’s explicit, unapologetic mission is the “Islamization of knowledge.” It is not a slogan or an idle phrase. The mission traces back to the ninth century. Its purpose was to defeat human reason. In this fundamentalist interpretation, Islam is a revealed, non-negotiable truth. Reason, rather than hailed as mankind’s path to knowledge and salvation, is condemned for diverting us from dogma. Knowledge therefore has to be Islamized — reality must be bent and history revised to accord with the Muslim narrative. But with the demise of reason comes the demise of progress, of the wisdom that enables us to solve problems. That is why Islamic societies stagnated, and why the resurgence of fundamentalism has made them even more backward and dysfunctional. It is this way with every totalitarian ideology. We’d be foolish to assume it can’t happen to us. Slaves to narrative are fugitives from reason. Their societies die. — Andrew C. McCarthy is a senior policy fellow at the National Review Institute and a contributing editor of National Review.

Read more at: