Op Ed Archives - The Closet on the Right

Posted by Lynzee Domanico March 8, 2019 Op Ed, Politics, The Closet On The Right One Comment

The Dangerous Reality Behind AOC

I think we’ve all figured out that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez isn’t joining MENSA anytime soon, but she is a rising star in the Democratic Party for some reason.

Since November, I often wonder about this “girl from the Bronx” who came out of nowhere.

Firstly, who voted for this person? Where did she even come from? How does a former bartender go from zero to hero in six months?

Seriously, how does someone with no professional experience or even a basic understanding of how our government works, land a seat in the House of Representatives?

Does anyone else think that’s strange?

Like most people, I dismissed AOC as a short-lived social media sensation whose voice would soon be lost in the noise of DC. Although, in the meantime, I have thoroughly enjoyed the steady stream of memes at her expense.

Honestly, she is single-handedly destroying blond jokes. There’s no way anyone could take her seriously, and yet, somehow, they are.

Her first piece of legislation right out of the gate, The Green New Deal, dealt a shockwave of horror through many even in her party. A bill that reads like an 8th-grade sociology project is a cleverly disguised push for socialism that’s veiled as an answer to climate change.

Multiple Democratic Presidential candidates have thrown their support behind the Green New Deal despite wide-spread criticism and condemnation. The “aggressive,” “on-scale” plan to address the “existential threat” of “climate change” is “obviously” what this country needs to “survive.” (Thank god this isn’t a video. My fingers would be cramping from all the aggressive air-quotes.)

I find it hard to believe “Sandy from the Bronx” came up with this all on her own.

My next question was: Who Did?

The Real Brains of the Operation

One day, I see a NowThis video pop up on my Facebook with AOC’s Chief Of Staff doing an interview. I don’t recognize who he is, but I recognize the person on his shirt.

Subhas Chandra Bose is the Fascist from India that accepted the help of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis to free India from Britain rule. The fascist idealist is a heroic figure in India for his fight to free his country from Britain’s overbearing control.

As Americans, I don’t think we can judge the guy for that. After all, we did it in 1776.

What separates Subhas Chandra Bose from George Washington, is that he was a fascist and socialist. He supported violence in political activism and even accepted help from Hitler and the SS to help his mission.

Subhas Chandra Bose and Hitler were kindred spirits. Both Socialists, both nationalists, and both fascists.

With that in mind, who on earth works for AOC that idolizes this guy?

This guy isn’t just any guy on her staff. It’s her Chief of Staff, Saikat Chakrabarti.

And Saikat Chakrabarti idolizes this Nazi loving fascist so much that he wears this shirt for everything. Not joking, he’s selling professionally shot images of himself and his team on stock image accounts for $199 per license.

For a Socialist, he sure does act like a Capitalist.

Who Is Saikat Chakrabarti?

Alright, let’s start from the beginning. Chakrabarti is a native Fort Worth, Texas and graduated from Harvard with a degree in Computer Science.

After graduation, he spent eight years in Silicon Valley working for various companies. He co-founded the wireframe building site Mockingbird.com and went on to help build the payment processing site, Stripe.com.

Once again, for a fascist-loving socialist, he sure does act like a capitalist. Between Mockingbird and Stripe, Chakrabarti is a self-made millionaire.

According to an interview in IndiaAbroad.com, he became disillusioned with society after graduating from Harvard and earning millions. Ummm, ok.

It was then he decided to leave the tech sector and go to work for the Bernie Sanders campaign.

You have to create the society you want to create and that is done through politics.-Saikrat Chakrabarti

Evidently, this society he wants to create involves breadlines and political oppression. Per Chakrabarti, Sanders didn’t have all the “right answers,” but he was talking about the “right problems.” During his time with the Sanders campaign, he learned how to harness the power of volunteers among many other things.

It was also here that he met his future business partners/activists, Alexandra Rojas, and Corbin Trent. (See above)

After Bernie’s loss to Hillary in the primaries, the team went on to form PACs Justice Democrats and Brand New Congress.

While Chakrabarti appears to be an ambitious and creative progressive activist on the surface, in reality, he’s positioning himself to influence politics for years to come.

The Reality

By helping AOC land her seat in the House of Representatives, Chakrabarti landed himself on the Politico Power Player list of 2019. The interviews with Saikat reveal a lot about his plans, and himself.

He’s creative, cunning and using the one progressive he managed to get elected as a face for his long-term plans.

When you shoot for big stuff, you stay true to the movement, you fight unapologetically on the inside, that is a very, very powerful way to pass the radical solutions that are necessary to face the radical problems that you have.- Saikat Chakrabarti

Keyword: RADICAL

First, he set up Brand New Congress to issue a sort of “casting call” to communities all over America with the intent of finding and then backing as many radical progressives as he could enlist. This was how he found gaffe-prone Ocasio-Cortez.

Here’s how it works:

I’ll give it to this guy, this is smart. Really smart. Chakrabarti founded and controls two major PACs with one simple goal: Pack the Government with Radicals like AOC.

Based on this alone, it’s clear that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez isn’t the brains behind her operation.

Here’s Why He’s Dangerous

Initially, when I started researching Chakrabarti I asked myself, “Why doesn’t he run for Congress himself?”

If we look at his goals, strategy and action plan; it becomes very clear.

Running on his own ticket would divert his attention away from mass producing candidates to challenge moderate Democrat incumbents.
If he loses his election, he loses his power.
AOC and other candidates make up for his shortcomings in relatability, social media presence, and personality. (Sorry, dude. No one wants to watch you cut vegetables in your kitchen while you rant about climate change)
If a candidate loses their election, he can move on to another one.
By helping and funding candidates win a seat in Congress, he has a clear path to Congress as well.
Even if AOC loses her next election, his process is repeatable every election cycle.

By structuring his PACs in the way he’s done, he’s essentially setting himself up to have a very long, very powerful career working behind the curtain to influence policies in Washington, DC.

Think about it, within the span of four years, Chakrabarti has propelled himself from campaign organizer to Chief of Staff. All he had to do was find someone to be the face of his grand plan.

Let’s be honest, if you peel back the slimy layers of the swamp, the power players aren’t the ones messing with their dentures nonstop. Nope, the real power players are the ones behind the scenes, advising on policy decisions, buying votes and playing a game by their own set of rules.

Granted, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is still dangerous. People are listening to, and supporting the message she is parroting, but she is merely a vessel.

Don’t let them fool you, America. If they want you to look here, it’s because something else is going on over there.

Posted by Michael Mathis March 3, 2019 Op Ed, Opinion, Politics No Comments

The Cohen Set Up

Do people really think that it’s a coincidence this congressional hearing that was set up on the same day that President Trump arrives in Vietnam to have a meeting with Kim Jung Un to negotiate a peace treaty?

Do you honestly feel this was not intentional to make President Trump look as bad as possible?

Our great President is on the other side of the world, trying to keep a crazy communist from blowing America up and starting a war.

While he’s not in America, Democrats are defaming his character in a congressional hearing!

WAKE UP AMERICA! The media is duping you, and the Democratic Party wants you to “hate” President Trump, when in fact, he is probably the only person in over five decades who has done anything for the country or even gives a crap about your wellbeing.

Seriously, if you still don’t understand the “real” collusion happening in America, then you need to go back to school and start over from the first grade. Or maybe you need to take yourself out of the indoctrinated school system and learn some good old fashioned common sense.

I, just as many others watched the Cohen congressional hearing, and I guarantee you I walked away from that hearing with a different mindset than what liberals did.

And I saw and watched the same hearing as you did.

Shady From the Beginning

First, Democrats waited until the night before to submit any evidence.

You must submit evidence to Congress at least twenty-four hours prior to any hearing per their requirements. Democrats deliberately disobeyed this requirement. Massive intentional violation of the rules in Congress? Appears to be the case.

Think about that for a moment.

How is it that Congress didn’t receive the evidence in time, but it was available to be broadcast on a national scale now? The Democrats deliberately withheld the evidence to prohibit Congressional Republicans from dismantling it.

Next, Representative Jim Jordon questioned why CNN had all the material before Congress had it. That’s a great question! How does CNN manage to know about highly sensitive happenings before anyone else does?

Naturally, he gets cut off by Representative Cummings because Michael Cohen “needs to be heard.”

In my opinion, the constitution no longer means anything to Congress anymore. America, we’re in dangerous times.

Before the Congressional hearing, members took a vote to decide if they should delay this hearing so everyone would have a chance to review the evidence submitted.

Although the majority of the votes were “NAY,” Mr. Cummings overrode the nay vote and forced the unconstitutional hearing.

Rep. Cummings reaffirmed once again that Democrats only care about the Constitution when it serves them.

A Different Set of Rules

The Democrats create their own rules and do what they want at the end of the day.

Alright, I have a question for all of you democratic loony toon liberals out there who are a part of the “justice movement.”

Does justice only matter if it swings in your favor?

No need to respond, I’m sure I’ll get all the hate emails afterward.

Moving onto the congressional hearing, which was a complete and total joke that lasted five and a half hours. This hearing should not have lasted any more than thirty minutes because it was that much of a waste of taxpayers dollars.

Now, I can sit here and break down word from word everything that has happened, but that would be too lengthy, so I am just going to go over some highlights.

The Hearing

First, do you guys know who orchestrated this entire hearing? Lanny Davis! The same Lanny Davis that is “best friends” with the Clinton’s.

Not only did he tell the committee staff that the hearing was his idea, but he also had to persuade the chairman to have the hearing. Also, he had to convince Michael Cohen, who is a “convicted perjurer” to come back into the courtroom and encourage this witness to violate a client-attorney privilege.

Michael Cohen was unable to provide any proof of his accusations to members of Congress. Aside from this “one check” that was submitted the night before the hearing, all other testimony was simply “name calling” and “slandering.”

Verbatim, Cohen stated,

“He’s a racist, and a conman, and a cheat.”

Ok, I think Obama is a cheat but does that mean I have any right to go and slander his name and smear his character in a Congressional hearing? Not unless I have some proof to back it up.

Multiple congressional representatives kept pointing out the fact that Michael Cohen is a pathological liar. However, many asked those present not to overindulge the signs that were made to make fun of him. Quite a few large signs called out Cohen as a “pathological liar.”

Question: Didn’t Michael Cohen already receive a conviction for lying to Congress? What makes this any different?

What drove me nuts about this circus of a hearing was how representatives such as Ms. Speier would “prompted” Michael Cohen questions.

Once again, Democrats are making up their own rules.

“How many times did President Trump have you threaten people, was 50 times, 100 times, 200 times?”

Sure sounds like prompting for a specific answer to me.

Also, did anyone catch how hilarious it was the Debbie Wasserman Shultz (who rigged the Democratic Party Primary so Hillary could win, and was also forced to resign because of it) questioned Michael Cohen about whether trump rigged the election? The lunacy is real, and you cannot make this stuff up.

No Seriously, she did ask this.

It’s not hard to see the sole purpose of this meeting was to smear President Trump and nothing else.

Lanny Davis used whatever leverage he still holds in DC to set up a Congressional hit job. Not surprisingly, the media was more than happy to participate.

Many of those foaming at the mouth for this hearing didn’t even watch the full interview. Yet, they content to use sound bites to “prove” their narrative of the President.

What I find the most interesting is that these supposed “intellectuals” are but a puppet for the media to use for their own gain. They know how to manipulate emotions and facts for maximum effect.

Sadly, Americans are buying into it and that’s the most frustrating part. What about you? Are you awake yet?

Posted by Michael Mathis February 19, 2019 Guest Post, Op Ed, Politics No Comments

[Guest Post] Nothing is Free in New York

Guess what, New York? Nothing is for free; everything comes at a cost.

First, I want to know why isn’t Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez about creating jobs?

Wasn’t she the one that said, “it’s inevitable to create jobs?” in her Green New Deal?

Hold up for one second; she only wants to create jobs if it partakes in increasing taxes, giving out small wages and deals with restructuring the economy to a socialistic government.

Ever since Jeff Bezos announced his interest in another headquarters for Amazon in New York City, AOC’s progressive movement opposed this possibility aggressively.

So much so, that Jeff Bezos axed any further discussions. Even Governor Cuomo and Mayor Bill de Blasio suggested it was because of her.

I have a couple of opinions on that.

1) Note to Jeff Bezos; this woman has never owned a business, why are you allowing her to push you around? I would say other things, but I have to keep the article family appropriate, that will be for the youtube channel I come out within the future.

2) This woman is proud that she caused a loss of 25,000 job opportunities in one of the lesser wealthy areas in New York. A city, by the way, that wasn’t even her district. This business project would have tremendously helped boost that part of the state’s economy considering they are looking at a $2.3B budget deficit.

Anything is possible: today was the day a group of dedicated, everyday New Yorkers & their neighbors defeated Amazon’s corporate greed, its worker exploitation, and the power of the richest man in the world. https://t.co/nyvm5vtH9k

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) February 14, 2019

Let Me Break This Down for You AOC

See this is how economics works: you invest in an area, even to clean it up, more people come to the area, more people spend money in the area. Then, that city gets more revenue, the economy for that city will increase, and the economy for that state will increase.

And she is proud that she cost Long Island and Queens 40,000 employees a possible job opportunity?

Dear who gave birth to you?

Do they know where you are? Are you lost in life?

(If I was serious about any of those questions, I would be going against my previous article accusing you of being smarter than you look.)

I am displaying how you are a threat to the Nation.

Here you go America, her true colors are coming out. You wanted to vote for her solely on identity politics.

A month in and she is already destroying jobs, in a city that is not that wealthy, and would have helped that city boost its economy.

Bravo, New York, Bravo.

New York elected this woman, and now New York sees the damage she is completely capable of causing.

New York, are you sure you want to remain blue? Personally I feel that the state of New York did a lot better when it was ran by John Gotti.

Posted by Michael Mathis February 14, 2019 Guest Post, Op Ed, Politics, Social Issues No Comments

The Real Threat of AOC and Her Agenda

Not the Brightest Bulb on the Tree

We’ve all seen the memes on Facebook and Twitter making fun of how irresponsible and stupid this woman is.

We all get a kick out of them as well. Of course, my favorite meme is Alexandria eating a box of crayons and saying, “this doesn’t taste like grape.”

It’s apparent this woman appears not to have a clue what she is talking about in many of her statements.

She thinks the three branches of government are the House, the Senate, and the “Presidency.”

AOC, please let me help you out babe, EXECUTIVE, LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL.

Not to mention, their titles are self-explanatory; I honestly don’t feel like I have to explain them.

Then, her little-coordinated protest of women “wearing white” at the SOTU address on February 5th, 2019, which allegedly stood for “women’s rights.” However, she refused to stand up for an ovation when President Trump announced saving hundreds of women at the border from being trafficked in from Mexico.

Not those women’s rights though.

Her recently proposed green energy bill that will place everyone back into the stone age riding bicycles to work in a blizzard. As a Denver resident, people driving around in 2WD is chaotic enough. Good one, AOC.

This “green bill” would also create jobs using solar power which would then get rid of racism somehow? Because those two topics just don’t mix at all.

She Still Can’t Answer the Million Dollar Question

Did anyone care to look at how much taxes she is proposing to make that happen?

In recent interviews, she’s expressed a desire to tax some citizens from 70-90%. According to AOC, this “marginal tax rate” would only impact the excessively wealthy who “don’t pay their fair share.”

What she fails to realize is that even if she taxed the most wealthy 5% of America, we would still fall very short of her radical plan.

To implement this plan, she would have to tax every American family at a 70-90% tax rate. Many families are struggling to pay their bills even with President Trump’s aggressive tax cuts. Many American families work more than one job to make ends meet.

Let me ask you this, how many jobs will you need to have a roof over your head if the US government takes 90% of your paycheck?

Visit A Socialist Country

As a child living in Germany, I spent two weeks in the socialist country and experienced socialism first-hand. (This system eventually failed in the Czech Republic and is now a liberated Republic.)

Since the state takes 90% of your paycheck, you have kids not to have a family but to have them work to pay for rent.

On your day off, you stand in line for several hours to receive an allotted grocery list based on your family size.

If you need shoes, you wait in line for two to three hours to get shoes. Unfortunately, if you wear a size ten and all they have left by the time you get to the end of the line is a size six, you’re cutting the toes off the shoes, or leave it.

The Reality of AOC

WAKE UP AMERICA, that is what socialism is. The state takes, and they don’t give. You don’t get options, you lose options.

And that is not the scary part! The scary part is this woman was elected into congress.

Does anyone realize what that means?

She manipulated a lot of uneducated people by telling a lie that life is better if we give her money to get free stuff.

This woman is smarter than she looks, and that’s not a good thing.

She convinced enough people to vote for her to get her into Congress so she can be a part of the legislative branch. Trust me; she is aware of what that is.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is more dangerous than most of you think, and what you don’t realize is they lie and repeat the lie to make it sound more and more convincing.

Do you think that this woman is this dumb? Or is the reality that she is playing dumb?

Our country is in severe danger for allowing a communist to be a part of the legislative branch. Unfortunately, it’s not just her. Several other radicals have joined her in Congress as well.

No, this is not paranoid fear mongering either, our country is doomed if we allow this trend to continue. The threat is real. I do not trust this woman, and she is not stupid.

Do not let her ignorance bypass as that innocent little school girl who randomly won an election with hopes and prayers from New York.

She’s a lot smarter than we are giving her credit for, and if you think for one second believe that she couldn’t hurt a fly, think of the actual position she is in with the government; THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH.

She’s in a position to influence the writing of legislation. Half of the country is already left-leaning Democratic. It’s not hard to convince a liberal to move to a socialistic idea.

The warnings are here. Are we going to listen?

Posted by David Dumas December 18, 2018 Op Ed, Social Issues, The Closet On The Right No Comments

Do Republicans Really Hate Gay People?

Recently, an article by author Chad Felix Green appeared in The Federalist. The article, titled The Stigma Against My Conservative Politics Is Worse Than The Stigma Of Being Gay is a point of view editorial by the author on his life, politics, and the backlash he’s faced since “coming out” as a conservative.

The response wasn’t great.

Like this from the Chairman of the Democratic Coalition

Or this from a Deadspin columnist.

Or this:

The list goes on. Rest assured, there was more random hate and outrage spewed at Chad from the left-wing community. The above examples are just a sampling of the response from the media and blue checkmark brigade.

Full Disclosure: I’m not gay. But Chad is. A fact that is obvious since he wrote the piece but also because he doesn’t hide many details of his life. As he outlined in his response to Jon Cooper’s tweet:

Why The Outrage?

It would be easy to pass this off as more leftist hate and double-standards. Does the ideologically-driven “left” of this country really hate people who “wander off the plantation” as commentator and provocateur Candace Owens often puts it?

Sure. There is a growing and religion-level orthodoxy to far leftist thinking. It is seeping into mainstream culture and being propagated by the corporate media.

When Kanye West dared say something nice about Trump, Hollywood acted as though he had a brain tumor. Literally.

When Steve Harvey declared he would be open to working with Trump to bring about positive change in the black community, the backlash essentially sent him back into the woodwork.

When actor/writer/director Mark Duplass tacitly endorsed Ben Shapiro by saying, essentially, “hey, if you want to hear an honest voice from the other side, check this guy out” the outrage came for him as well. He was forced to retract.

Because feminist and sex educator Laci Green has *dared* converse with Conservatives and Republicans over the last few years; often debating them and taking a pretty typical “leftist” stance on most issues: she’s a travelling companion of the alt-right now, according to Vox.

The list goes on. The backlash against these individuals, as well as Chad Felix Green, shows the evangelical-level ferocity with which “the left” fights back against those who are led astray from the party line of the inter-sectional flock.

But of course, these views didn’t appear out of nowhere. Republicans and Conservatives have not historically been great on gay rights. However, the question is: where are they now?

Do Republicans Hate Gay People?

I am not now, nor have I ever been a registered Republican. However, I am far more “on the right” than “the left” so sure, I’ll stand-in for Republican thought here.

Do Republicans hate gay people? Some of them do, sure. The same as some Democrats do. Some Libertarians do as well. Green Party? I’m sure there’s homophobia in there as well. Traditionally, since Republicans were closely associated with certain religious groups, this has been magnified.

Those attitudes, however, are changing. As recently as 2001, a majority of Americans did not support same-sex marriage. That position has been changing rapidly since then.

Among religious-minded folks, attitudes have continued to change as well. Now, a majority of both Catholics and mainline Protestants support same-sex marriage.

When viewed through a partisan lens, Republicans have also been coming around.

In fact, a greater percentage of self-identified “Conservatives” (41%) are likely to support same-sex marriage than self-identified Republicans (40%).

We’re Moving In the Right Direction

I realize those numbers aren’t where “the left” want them to be. They aren’t where we, as a society, should want to be either. But to put it simply, things don’t change overnight. Attitudes and opinions don’t change because of a law or an outrage mob. Nor should we expect them to. Nor should we attempt to force them to, lest we’re okay with creating a backlash.

In just a little over a decade, attitudes towards same-sex marriage have more than completely reversed. From 54% opposing in 2007 to 62% supporting in 2017.

Perception, prejudice, bias, and hate do not disappear overnight. However, this is about as close to that occurring as you’re likely to see as an example.

No, I don’t think Republicans don’t by and large “hate” gay people. At least not the ones I’m familiar with and associate with. I’ve honestly not seen a real example of hatred directed towards homosexuality by anyone in my personal circle, past or present.

Is it true that some individuals may not approve of the lifestyle? Yes. And remember, according to the chart above, nearly 1/3 of Democrats would fall into that category as well.

And that has more to do with the fact that it takes time to bring about change.

My Own Story

If you had asked me 10 years ago if I supported gay marriage, my response would likely have been lukewarm at best. Maybe? Maybe not. If there was a a vote on it… I’m not sure I would have voted for it. Honestly? I don’t know.

I didn’t harbor any ill will towards the gay community, mind you. And I didn’t think being gay was bad, wrong, or sinful. Truth be told, I don’t think I had a strong opinion on it. I honestly don’t know. I don’t know why most of America didn’t support gay marriage back then either. We, as a society, just didn’t.

My views on this, and many other things, have changed. And they didn’t change because an angry mob yelled at me for being homophobic. They didn’t change because a law was passed to punish me if I said “hey, I’m not sure about gay marriage.” My views didn’t change because gay marriage was upheld by the Supreme Court. No. None of these moved the needle.

They changed for the same reason that anyone else changes their mind. Time and experience.

When It Happens Close To Home

For a time I worked in a profession where homosexuals are, let’s say, well represented. I came to enjoy working with these individuals and considered a few of them friends.

Yes, I had (and have) gay friends. Some of them became close friends. The same as any other friendship.

For me, the primary change to my way of thinking came from a particular experience I had. Several years ago and through my work I had become friendly with a lesbian couple. I had known them for several years at this point. Our relationship was a typical employee/customer relationship but it was friendly and in many ways personal.

One of the women became sick. Very sick. She required a major surgery to get better. Her partner, a woman with whom she’d been in a committed relationship with for upwards of 20 years, was not allowed any type of spousal or partner privilege. This would have been around 2007ish. Gay marriage wasn’t legal yet at this time.

In the eyes of the medical community (and more specifically, the laws governing it), she was basically a concerned friend. And friends don’t get granted special permissions, privileges, or access.

These two women were every bit as connected and committed to one another as any heterosexual couple. Yet, the doctors wouldn’t (couldn’t) discuss treatment options, test results, prognosis, etc. Nothing. Family members only. And you’re not family.

I didn’t agree with that. It seemed wrong. It was.

That Did It.

And so my mind changed. It had already been changing before then, but this was the final experience which caused me to re-examine my stance and change my mind. And it changed because that’s how mind’s change. Through time and experience. Through exposure to different people, cultures, and situations.

It wasn’t because a law was passed. And it wasn’t because an angry mob shamed me into getting on board. It was because the reality of the situation had hit close enough to home that I was able to have a serious conversation with myself and decide.

I realize we live in a woke culture where everyone is supposed to take an obvious stance on issues like this. Younger folks may not realize that there was a time not too long ago where we, as a society, didn’t “just know” the correct stance to take.

So What Now?

I’m sure some Republicans do hate gay people. And I’m sure some Democrats do as well. Which is all the more reason, in my opinion, to treat people like individuals and judge them on their actions and words rather than whatever immutable characteristic box we can put them in.

It’s also all the more reason to not ascribe a presumed viewpoint or policy position to someone based solely on the letter (R) or (D) next to their name. People are a diverse group. Our opinions are often complicated. Sometimes they conflict with one another. Sometimes they go against stereotypical expectations.

If you believe in ideas rather than assumptions; in principles rather than people, you’ll find fellow travelers in places you didn’t think you would.

Back to Chad

What is clear, however, is that the people who came to attack Chad Felix Green were not Republicans who were outraged by him daring to compare his Conservative-ness to being gay. It was the left-wing outrage brigade which sought to ridicule him for daring to say “hey, it was tougher for me to be accepted as a conservative than as a gay man.”

I’m sure that’s not the experience of everyone who “comes out” as gay, conservative, or both. However, that was his. Agree, disagree, or other. Think it doesn’t matter? That’s fine. Think he’s crazy? Okay. Think he’s just plain old wrong about this? Hey, that’s fine too.

But don’t try to silence him or tell him to shut up for sharing his experience. You’re free to dismiss it. That’s your right. But if I know Chad (and I don’t), I don’t think you’ll have much luck getting him to shut up.

What’s also clear is that those who came to Chad Felix Green’s defense were not Liberal Democrats. They weren’t cut from the Progressive cloth. They were Conservatives, Republicans, and Libertarians.

Draw whatever conclusions you like from that. Call it pandering to those evil gay-hating Republicans if you will. I happen to think Chad would call it progress.

So would I.

Posted by Lynzee Domanico December 16, 2018 Op Ed, Social Issues, The Closet On The Right No Comments

Ten Reasons I Reject Feminism

Once upon a time, our grandmothers and great-grandmothers marched for the right to vote.

Women all over the country wanted more than a life of standing barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.

They wanted to go to college, have a career, make their own money and have an identity outside of their husband and family.

First Wave Feminism — Credit: thedevelopmentofwomensrights.weebly.com

It was a long, hard fought battle; but in the end, we won. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act Passes giving all citizens of the United States equal rights under the law.

Granted, overcoming generations of gender discrimination was still a battle fought daily. However, as I write these words, there is nothing I can’t do in this country that a man can.

The transformation of feminism has changed over the past several decades, and to be completely honest, I don’t like what I see.

As a married, gay woman who also happens to be 75% hispanic, you would think I, of all people need feminism in my life. Right?

Sorry, no. I reject modern-day feminism and here are ten reasons why.

1) There’s Nothing Empowering about Modern Feminism

Feminist heads all over the world just exploded.

“Feminism is ONLY about EMPOWERMENT, Lynzee!”

Really? Then why do Feminist power-houses like Barbara Streisand and Michelle Obama insist that women in this country are so powerless, they can’t even decide who to vote for without their husbands?

If modern Feminism is about empowerment, why does California need a law requiring major companies have women on their boards?

Modern feminist decries the patriarchy and the systemic oppression of women by the straight white male. They have set their laser-sighted target directly on the backs of men as justification why women can’t be successful.

Women are stronger, better and smarter than men, right? If feminists genuinely believe that, their narrative wouldn’t promote the concept of women being “less than” while feminism conveniently rushes in to balance the cosmic scales.

Which brings me to my next point:

2) Feminism Deflects Responsibility

Feminist must shift blame and responsibility from their own short-comings to someone else.

Women aren’t responsible for their lack of success. Rather, men are oppressing women and therefore must be shamed, guilted and coerced into submission because…equality.

When a society must establish a different set of rules, requirements, and quotas for a different gender or race; that is not equality. That is simply a new type of discrimination against the qualified and talented that’s disguised as affirmative action.

This particular point applies to many aspects of feminism. Just google the “I need Feminism because” and you will see what I mean. One woman needs feminism because she doesn’t get asked out by boys or go on many dates.

Rather than take the opportunity to do some personal reflection and figure out why the boys aren’t asking her out, she uses feminism to deflect responsibility onto men. Obviously, there is something flawed with men.

3) Selective Outrage

This one really gets me. Feminists are the loudest and most obnoxious in the room when it comes to pointing out and criticizing issues.

However, I hear nothing but crickets when it comes to the horrid treatment of women and girls in many other countries.

Feminists fight the patriarchal oppression of the United States tirelessly. However, these activists can leave their home without a male escort. They can attend whatever school they like, be whatever they want to be, drive a car, own a home and even choose their partners.

So why is it, that women all over the world who cannot have these things get zero support from modern feminists.

In fact, it seems as though they are apologists to these oppressive cultures because Americans are rejecting their barbaric ways!

As if turning a blind eye to such atrocities weren’t enough, Feminists put advocates for oppressive systems front and center of their campaign.

No thank you.

4) I Don’t Hate Men

Shocking, I know. As a now gay woman who was once married to a man, you would think I hate men but I don’t.

I just don’t want intimate relationships with them.

I do however, acknowledge their strengths and invaluable contributions to society. To deny otherwise is ignorant, short-sighted and just plain false.

Just because our society operated differently at one point in history, does not mean I need to hold bitterness and resentment to men today.

Not only that, just because men operated within the socially accepted norms of their times does not make them bad or evil men who want to hurt or oppress women.

5) Men And Women are Biologically Different

This is scientifically undeniable, end of story.

Denying this and forcing institutions to accept women can prove to be dangerous. I’ll give you an example:

The first thing that comes to mind is women in the military, or more specifically, women in combat. If women are in active combat, yes, they have the strength to pull the trigger.

However, do they have the strength to pull a 200+lbs man off the battlefield if his life depended on it? Can a woman physically perform the required activities to do her job and ensure the safety of those around her?

If so, then let her in. I have no issues. If she can’t, then I’m a solid no. This isn’t discrimination; this is common sense.

If there are jobs in these fields where a woman can provide value and her life or others’ lives, don’t depend on her physical abilities, then great. I’m in for that as well.

I reject this form of feminism because as a woman, I would not want to be personally responsible for someone else’s safety if there was even the slightest doubt I could physically perform a task.

There are other ways women can contribute in meaningful ways that don’t put others in harm’s way just because of progress.

6) There’s Nothing Toxic About Masculinity

Read virtually any ancient manuscript or holy book and you will see an emphasis on the masculine and feminine balance.

Like all things in nature, balance in the key to survival. Therefore, criminalizing masculinity to promote your superior vision of feminism is detrimental to society.

Do you remember at one point it was discouraged for boys to cry?

Feminism has completely flipped the script to the point where now “boys being boys” is a bad thing. That is unless you’re a girl who wants to be a boy, then knock yourself out. Toxic masculinity doesn’t apply to you.

7) I don’t Need the Validation of Feminism to Make Something of Myself

Women have been overcoming obstacles and accomplishing great things for thousands of years. (Marie Curie anyone?) Yes, early feminism helped open up the path for ambitious women to pursue their dreams, but now those obstacles are gone.

There is nothing stopping a woman from becoming a doctor, a scientist, a lawyer or even President (as long as you’re not Hillary *shudder*).

So why would I need feminism to tell me I can? I don’t and neither do you.

In reality, feminism highlights and emphasizes all the ways women are “less than” or oppressed more than anything.

Thanks but I already knew I didn’t need a husband to make my own decisions, Barbra Streisand.

And for women who do form decisions with the help of their husbands or partners? So what! Just because some women have healthy and mutually respectful relationships does not mean it’s an insult to feminism.

8) I’m Not Angry And Bitter

I’m sorry, but it seems like all feminists have evolved into confrontational, angry, bitter and resentful people.

Why are you so angry?

Maybe instead of focusing on what everyone else is doing and how you disprove, you should work on improving your own life.

If a company doesn’t hire you because you’re a woman, go work somewhere else! Why would you want to work there? It sounds like an awful work environment, and I’m sure there are plenty of other companies you would be happier working for.

Rather than being angry and bitter over a perceived injustice, walk away and find a situation that is better suited for you! Why harbor and stew over something?

Personally, I don’t want to live my life as a perpetual victim. I’d much rather choose to be happy, let go of the things that don’t serve me and strive to be the best me.

This can all be accomplished without a cheering squad of hostile, shaved head, hairy armpitted, overly pierced and blue haired activists making sure I’m aware of all the ways I’m oppressed. Hard pass.

9) Feminism Isn’t Progressive, it’s Regressive

If your activism involves antics that are so outrageous and cringe-worthy that people stop taking you seriously, it’s time to reevaluate your mission.

The #MeToo movement along with #BelieveAllWomen has hurt the feminist mission more than it has helped. By encouraging women to use assault and rape accusations regardless of proof, damages all credibility. The result is more skepticism and doubt to any claim as opposed to what they wanted.

The Kavanaugh circus made this worse by showing that feminists are willing to sacrifice their own in their attempt at political gain.

Their quest to destroy the man who potentially posed a threat to their reproductive rights put several women and even young girls in danger.

Feminists have proven they are willing to lie, destroy, and disrespect anyone in their way.

Last, The Future Is NOT Female

Sorry, Kirsten Gillibrand. The future is not female. The future is not intersectional.

If we want any hope for a prosperous future, the future needs to be men and women complimenting one another like they always have.

Overcoming the stigma that one sex is superior to the other is exactly what early feminists fought so hard to change. Now, modern feminism is promoting exactly that.

Feminists have become the monster their grandmothers fought against.

I for one want to live in a world where no race, or gender is superior to any other. Each have their strengths. Each have their weaknesses.

By working together to compliment one another is how we make our future brighter.

Posted by Lynzee Domanico December 10, 2018 Guest Post, Op Ed, Politics, The Closet On The Right No Comments

Arizona Midterm Election, A Closer Look [GUEST POST]

On The Hunt for Facts

Since the recent election, I was concerned about the outcome.

The Republican candidate in Arizona for Senator won on election night. However, the Democrat candidate was declared the winner almost a week later.

With other elections such as Florida and other states having allegations of voter fraud, I took it upon myself to at least in a small way look at the results myself.

I started with getting the election results from previous elections, dating back to 2010 for comparison, going granular not only by county but by precinct in each county.

Then I made a spreadsheet.

Well, because I like to do spreadsheets and yes I am that guy. I did find some rather interesting results.

The Counties

First, let’s start with the simple number of registered voters versus actual votes counted.

Obviously, A should never be larger than B, such as Precinct 1 would have 500 registered but only 300 voted including early ballots, provisional, etc. Here’s what I found.

Apparently, the accounting is not correct, especially if these are supposed to be the official results.

I also added the 203 column, which referred to Prop 203 in 2010 which legalized medical marijuana in Arizona.

Again, it had the same pattern.

Polls said Arizonians didn’t want it. Election night the vote said outright that they didn’t want it.

But hey what’s this, a box? Oh, interesting there’s all these uncounted ballots, and well looky-here it just happens that there are enough votes that it did pass by 4,341.

As I mentioned, these are from the official results from the Arizona Secretary of State.

This alone shows that there is not a proper accounting in the least of whether the registered versus voters are legitimate. Here’s the breakdown by precinct.

The Precincts

First, I am not showing the actual vote tallies merely because I do not know if they’ve been officially released to the public. First, since the vote tallies are yet to be released publicly, we won’t be stating those here. I just called up each county to ask and they either directed me to the location or they emailed it to me directly.

So until I see that’s it’s been put onto the website as released I’m going to treat it as embargoed, just in case.

The Breakdown

What I have here are all 26 precincts that have more votes than registered. Column F shows the number of votes over and above what was registered.

Columns H and I, well ok I guess I’ll show the votes here, no one tells anyone ok?

Column J is the percentage of votes to registered, essentially the turnout.

At the top is 67%, that’s the average throughout the state.

As you can see going down the column these areas had an overabundance of turnout.

And of course, the R and D is who won or a tie if the vote was the same for both.

Therefore, column O is the amount of percentage over and above the state average.

Yeah, granted, some areas had lower turnout over here and higher turnout over there. Taking these out for this point, there are areas that had 0% or really low turnout, and areas as high as 97%.

However, Doney Park at 1824%?

Oh, Yuma, it had zero registered voters and 19 actual voters, I have no idea how to calculate that one.

So columns P & Q (sorry for S & T, ended up duplicating) are then weighted to that 67% average of what that vote might have looked like. This would mean that McSally would’ve had 3,408 votes less and Sinema 5,712.

The next sheet I’ll admit is purely speculative, and you could shoot a thousand holes into it.

Previous Trends

What I did here was in each election going back to 2010 I looked at all the races to look at one specific criterion.

On off-years such as this one, I looked at the Governor candidates, 2016 and 2012 were Presidential candidates.

For each precinct I wanted to gauge whether it leaned Republican or Democrat, going by say for 2018 Precinct 1 carried the Republican, and so on.

In total, I had five elections to base that on, so if a precinct went four or five for a given candidate I would say it would lean that way, less than that I disregarded it.

I then asked some simple questions. How can this precinct that was historically Republican-leaning could vote for Sinema?

That to me had a big disconnect.

True, maybe McSally didn’t campaign there. Maybe she said she was anti-Trump and the voters didn’t like that? Again, many variables.

But that’s a large number, as I show here that’s 11.4% of the precincts that for all five elections were leaning Republican decided to switch?

The next column is worse, looking solely at the 2018 election, those precincts that carried Ducey 237 decided to vote against McSally? Or more precisely voted for the Socialist candidate that in several videos referred to Arizona as the Meth lab of the United States, as well as the sixth C for crazy.

Yeah, I’m sure Arizona wanted that.

The next two columns I did the same questions for Prop 203, received even more stark numbers.

Now granted, demographics shift. Precincts get redrawn, some are added to this election and others dissolved. And as I mentioned maybe McSally had her own issues with getting the message out. It’s just that to me this seems very odd, someone is going to explain it to me.

So let me be clear. If Sinema won fair-and-square then so be it. The manner in which this was done leaves me with huge suspicions, and the released data doesn’t help that. In the very least it shows that the tallying has problems, either in the number of registration or in the vote counting.

Granted, mistakes happen. However, did anyone pick up on the last columns I had, where it said R and D?

The number of precincts that I note had 6 where McSally won and 20 that Sinema won. If you take out Yuma since I don’t know, zero registered voters, that gives 5 Republican questionable to Democrat’s 20.

Very interesting to me.

Right now I have serious doubts as to the legitimacy of Sinema’s election. Until those concerns are addressed, quite frankly, I do not recognize her as my Senator. There is too much potential fraud going on here, I don’t know what to make of it.

Lastly, I do concede that it may be that the Republicans need to turn out the vote better next time. I made this sheet to show the weak points versus the strong and who won in each. Heck, the Democrats could even use this, I don’t mind if they use it, I don’t mind a fair fight.

To See the Full Spreadsheet with all the Data, click here Full Spreadsheet.

Posted by Lynzee Domanico November 20, 2018 Op Ed, Politics, The Closet On The Right 2 Comments

Romanticizing Communism

Media Outlets are Promoting Communism

Communism in China — Credit: NYT The Land that Failed to Fail

It was a casual Sunday. My daughter had another grueling two-hour volleyball practice that I use to catch up on whatever project I’m working on at the moment.

Naturally, a lot of scrolling happens during these practices. During my snoozefest scrolling sesh, I saw it.

An NYTimes Article is romanticizing “Communist” China. Inappropriately titled, “The Land that Failed to Fail.”

Now, this is the second time in recent months I’ve seen a magazine article romanticizing the concept of Communism. The last time was Teen Vogue of all places.

Everything You Should Know About Karl Marx https://t.co/FoXZXKGN55 pic.twitter.com/5SjYmPkcI4

— Teen Vogue (@TeenVogue) May 12, 2018

A growing discontent for capitalism and a resurgence of Communism or “Democratic Socialism” (as some on the Left like to use as a disguise for Communism) is spreading in the United States.

Let’s focus on this one particular article about the success of Chinese Communism though. It says,

In the uncertain years after Mao’s death, long before China became an industrial juggernaut, before the Communist Party went on a winning streak that would reshape the world, a group of economics students gathered at a mountain retreat outside Shanghai.

The article goes on to boast the massive growth of China’s economy in the past 40 years as some Communist Christmas Miracle. This miracle defied all odds and didn’t fail when everyone said it would.

Why is this article idolizing Communism as some socioeconomic beacon of success?

Seriously? Has this writer ever been to China?

Every nation that attempts Communism fails, including China. The only thing remaining in China that is Communist is the political party that should have but didn’t abandon the name after it failed.

Don’t believe me? Let’s look at some history and most importantly, some facts.

A Brief History

Communist China — Image Credit: Ron Paul Liberty Report

Mao Zedong defeated the existing Chinese regime in 1949.

Immediately after, he brought true, authentic Communism to the people of China.

Communism is not Love.

Communism is the hammer which we use to crush the enemy. -Mao Zedong

His first order of business was equally distributing all land among the people.

Next, he centralized all means of production under the control of the state. Agriculture shifted to a system of collective farming.

Landlords and capitalists were suppressed and stripped of all property and wealth.

Mao’s Great Leap Forward was a massive failure that led to famine and death of its citizens. This failure inevitably led to Mao tightening his grip on the population. Any critics of his radical ideology were imprisoned or killed.

Political powers grows out of the barrel of a gun. -Mao Zedong

The Communist reign of Mao ultimately led to the death of up to 80 million people and China was only freed of the tyranny in 1976 when he finally died.

Communism did fail in China. What is left does not even remotely resemble Communism.

Since the NYT author failed to examine the facts, we took the liberty to do it for him.

The Ten Planks of Communism

Let’s look at the ten basic tenets of Communism.

Abolition of Property in Land and Application of all Rents of Land to Public Purpose.
A Heavy Progressive or Graduated Income Tax.
Abolition of All Rights of Inheritance.
Confiscation of the Property of All Emigrants and Rebels.
Centralization of Credit in the Hands of the State, by Means of a National Bank with State Capital and an Exclusive Monopoly.
Centralization of the Means of Communication and Transport in the Hands of the State.
Extension of Factories and Instruments of Production Owned by the State, the Bringing Into Cultivation of Waste Lands, and the Improvement of the Soil Generally in Accordance with a Common Plan.
Equal Liability of All to Labor. Establishment of Industrial Armies, Especially for Agriculture.
Combination of Agriculture with Manufacturing Industries; Gradual Abolition of the Distinction Between Town and Country by a More Equable Distribution of the Population over the Country.
Free Education for All Children in Public Schools. Abolition of Children’s Factory Labor in its Present Form. Combination of Education with Industrial Production.

Now Let’s Compare with China

Abolition of private property- Nope. You can own a home in China. Granted, you don’t own the land it is on, but real estate is a booming industry in China. By a Marxist definition, the land is not used solely for the public purpose. In fact, the state issues 70 year leases on land
A Heavy Progressive Income Tax- Again, not even close. The tax rate for most Chinese is lower than many countries like Japan and the Nederlands.
Abolition of Rights of Inheritance- Wrong again. Here is the Law of Succession in the Peoples’ Republic of China.
Confiscation of Emigrants and Rebels- Partially correct. Foreigners can own a home in China as long as they have lived in the country for 12 consecutive months. Although, I’m not sure why anyone would want to.
Centralization of Credit, Banks, Capital, etc.-

Noooooooope. There are privately owned banks in China. The government stifles their businesses with regulations, restriction of assets and laws, but they exist.
Centralization of Means of Communication and Transportation- No. Independent and privately owned transportation and communication exist. It was previously under State control. However, this was one of the economic reforms implemented in the 80’s and 90’s. It must be stated that the media, the internet and other forms of communication are heavily supervised by the State though.
Production/Means of Production Owned by the State- No. The transition away from SOE (state-owned enterprise) was one of the first economic reforms of the 80’s and 90’s when China was removing the layers of Communism from their economy. In fact, the private sector was responsible for 70% of the economic growth once China was free from Communism.
Equal Liability To Labor- Borderline accurate. China does command one of the world’s most massive armies. However, in terms of Marxism, China does not meet these requirements any longer.
Combination of Agricultural and Manufacturing Industries; In other words, the elimination of class separation- Definitely not. There is a pretty significant distinction between wealth and class in China. The nation of China boasts an impressive 476 BILLIONAIRES. The only country that beats them is the United States.
Free Education- Yes and no. State-owned and operated are the preferred secondary education. However, they are incredibly competitive. Also, there are fees and tuition costs, but China’s student debt is virtually non-existent.

What Remains of Communism in China

Above all, China has maintained a strong and authoritative position over the population.

Recently, China increased their interference in the privacy of their citizens with new technology. Their new surveillance technology monitors each person using facial recognition. Citizens are rewarded or penalized based on day-to-day behaviors that include small things such as manners, to others such as smoking.

Citizens in good standing receive additional privileges, while others not in good standing experience fines and even travel restrictions.

Yikes. No thank you.

Freedom of speech is not a thing in China, either.

Due process? Well, it’s gotten better over the years, but the Chinese are known for imprisoning its people for virtually anything.

Example: An Author was recently sentenced to ten years in prison for writing about a gay sex scene in a book.

Religious persecution is common in China, and they are also a very nationalistic nation. (Think about their Olympic team. Zero diversity. ZERO.)

Google is currently under intense scrutiny from its employees for agreeing to work with the Chinese government to spy on and control internet usage for its population.

When you look closely, China has more in common with Fascism than Communism at this point. (Don’t tell Liberals, they’ll lose their minds)

Final Nail in the Coffin of Communism in China

Karl Marx’s utopian vision for society relied on the elimination of the bourgeois. In his mind, societies that exploited the proletariat were evil and must be abolished.

The exchange of labor for a wage, in his mind, was modern day slavery. To reverse this evil system, he believes the State should distribute land equally and create a nation where no one man has anything more than any other.

Sit down, Lefties. I’m about to burst your bubble.

Currently, in China, their entire economy is driven by and relies upon the proletariat. China’s economy has thrived by creating mass-produced exportable goods at prices lower than any other country in the world.

Unfortunately for the Communist, China has been able to lift more people out of poverty by eliminating Communism and implementing Capitalism.

Furthermore, I challenge any Communist, Socialist or Leftist to prove me wrong.

Until then, do yourself a favor and stop romanticizing Communism in articles that you write on your MacBook Pro from your high rise New York City offices.

Posted by Lynzee Domanico November 3, 2018 Op Ed, Politics, Social Issues, The Closet On The Right 8 Comments

The Case for Gay Republicans

Gay Republicans are Real

Many on the Left gasp in horror when they meet Gay Republicans. Somehow, being gay became synonymous with being a raging Liberal.

I’m not a raging Liberal. In fact, I never have been. I flirted with the Left briefly after I “came out”, but I ended up running back to the Right once I realized I wasn’t obligated to be there.

This concept was simple for me to understand. I didn’t agree with Liberals on anything aside from gay marriage, so why would I base my vote on a Democrat on one issue?

However, this is considered a cardinal sin in the LGBT world.

It doesn’t have to be. Here’s why.

The LGBT Community Needs A Strong Economy Too

It’s pretty hard to U-Haul on the second date if you don’t have enough money to buy or rent a house.

Economic prosperity means you and your partner, regardless of what you “identify” as, will have the money to do the things you want to do.

Voting Democrat because you support LGBT rights, also means you’re voting for higher taxes, more government regulations, and weaker economies.

There are other policies that come along with your vote for the Left.

Your Democrat Congressman may support your right to change your gender on your driver’s license, but he also supports legislation that suffocates businesses.

If you can’t put food on your table, does it really matter what your license says?

It may to you, but you can’t employ thousands of people with your gender designation.

Open Borders are Bad for Everyone

Being gay does not mean you are obligated to save the world.

In fact, open borders is a terrible idea for the LGBT community because many of the people who want to flood here, punish gays in their native countries with the death penalty.

Allowing anyone to come here without vetting and due process puts our culture, our way of life and our government at risk.

If these people are unwilling to assimilate to American culture, they will bring their archaic beliefs with them. They will elect people who represent those beliefs. Those Representatives will influence legislation and ultimately, you.

Linda Sarsour, a prominent Muslim activist for the Democratic Party is vocally anti-Semitic and pro-Sharia Law. For some reason, she is the poster child for Liberal tolerance and diversity.

However, if she were to get her way and Sharia Law ruled America; women would be oppressed, gays would be executed, and the LGBT community would be forced underground once again.

Ever wonder why there are no Muslims in the Republican Party? Islam promotes traditional family structure, opposes abortion and much like the Christians, are devout to their God. It would actually make MORE sense for the Muslims to run under a Republican ticket, right?

Wrong. Their fundamental beliefs directly contradict American values and rule of law.

Nationalism does not always equal racism. Racism does not always require Nationalism.

Promoting Nationalism means that you want the people of your country to be taken care of first.

If you’re gay, straight, black, white, Hispanic etc and are a citizen of this nation, that applies to you.

Embrace it. Cherish it. Protect it.

The 2^nd Amendment Applies to Everyone

The LGBT was the victim of violence for many years. (Ironically, now it’s conservatives.)

Do you think if Matthew Shepherd had been armed that night in Wyoming, he would have been beaten to death? Absolutely not.

Communities who arm themselves remove victimhood from their lives.

Buy a gun, learn how to use it and change the script of our story. Being gay does not mean you have to be a victim, ever.

Everyone has the right to protect themselves.

Abortion is Murder

Last time I checked, gay people didn’t have to worry about unwanted pregnancy.

In fact, many gay and lesbian couples would gladly take any unwanted baby and raise them in a loving family.

Your sexuality does not mean you have to support someone else’s irresponsibility.

Life is precious and if you are a gay couple who have to pay thousands of dollars to build your family, you should protect it all costs.

If that doesn’t change your mind, watch a video of an abortion being performed.

It will break your heart, turn your stomach and traumatize you for life.

Finally, Gay Marriage is Settled

The Supreme Court ruled on gay marriage. We’ve established the precedence and overturning it would be very difficult. Justice Brett Kavanaugh confirmed this ruling during his confirmation process.

When pressed on the issue of Gay Marriage, he stated that the Supreme Court had already ruled on the treatment of homosexual people.

The Republican Party has moved on, so should you.

In fact, almost all of the bigotry, homophobia, and hate I’ve experienced since I came out was from the Left.

Shocked?

You shouldn’t be. The Democrats have a long and violent history of hate, racism, and discrimination.

It wasn’t until the 1950’s when they figured out the minority vote is a powerful tool. They’ve been pushing the oppressed and victim platform ever since.

In reality, most Democrats opposed gay marriage for most of their careers. If you think they suddenly care about you now, I have a bridge to sell you.

Just Be An American

Ultimately, the Republican party doesn’t care your race, religion or orientation if you love and protect your country.

Take a look at what you stand for. What you really stand for, not for what they tell you to stand for. Are the Democrat solutions really what is best for yourself and this country?

Talk to a conservative or many. How do they treat you?

Furthermore, disagree with a liberal. See how they treat you.

We need to stop defining ourselves by singular issues like race, orientation or gender. We are so much more than that and at the end of the day, you’re just as human as anyone else. If you take the “gay” out of your identity for one minute, would you still vote the same?

It’s okay to identify with ALL the things that make you, you. Stop allowing the Democratic Party to hold you hostage because of identity politics.

You deserve better.

The Gay Republican movement is growing stronger by the day. We’re ready for you to join us.

Are you a Gay Republican and want to show your Pride and your Party?! Check out the Closet on the Right Shop!

Posted by David Dumas October 29, 2018 #WalkAway, Op Ed, Opinion No Comments

I First Encountered The Hateful Left Nearly 20 Years Ago. It’s Worse Now

It’s hard to pinpoint when this deep, divisive animosity first washed over the country. The election of Donald Trump seems like the starting point to many. However, I can personally trace the beginnings of this back to my days in high school in the early 2000’s. That is when I first encountered the hateful left

This is admittedly anecdotal.

My Beginnings.

I grew up in New York in the 1980’s and 1990’s. My parents were Republicans and loved Ronald Reagan. Though I knew my parents were Republicans, neither of them were particularly outspoken. I knew they voted red and liked Reagan. That was about as much of a political “indoctrination” as I had growing up.

We never spoke about politics, policies, or programs at the dinner table. Politics just wasn’t a part of our daily life. I never heard my parents talk about it with their friends, and my friends and I certainly didn’t know or care enough when I was young. Flash-forward to high school, the year 2000, and the 2000 Presidential Election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. This is when I first encountered the hateful left.

The 2000 Election And The Hateful Left

I was not old enough to vote in the 2000 election but my high school was doing a mock election of sorts as part of a learning exercise in politics, elections, etc. Remember, I had no clue about politics. I had no idea who Al Gore or George W. Bush was. I didn’t know or care about their politics, views, or policies.

A classmate and I were talking about the upcoming mock election and he asked me who I was voting for. I said I was voting for Bush. Why? I dunno. He was the Republican candidate and my parents were Republicans. I didn’t care, so whatever. I should pull the lever for Bush. It’s a mock election at a high school in New York and I’m 17 years old. As a result, it’s not like it means anything, right?

The look on my classmate’s face, and I still remember it, is usually reserved for people who admit to torturing small animals.

“Ew, you’re a Republican?” He asked. “How could you be that?”

To repeat myself yet again, remember that I had no idea what a Republican was. To be 100% fair, I’m sure my classmate really didn’t either. We were 17 after all. However, he had been taught in some way, shape, or form; perhaps by his parents, that Republicans were bad. Not just wrong or misguided or a political opponent. But bad.

Imagine My Reaction

I was surprised. Shocked, maybe. The moment still sticks out in my mind almost 20 years later. I may have even felt ashamed. For some reason, I had “outed” myself as something that other people looked down on. Something bad. Something maybe even evil as far as they were concerned.

That was the first moment I felt hatred from “the left.” It’s anecdotal, sure. I have no idea what became of my classmate or what he considers himself to be today, politically speaking. Granted, he was not “the left” at 17 years old and every bit as uninformed as I was. But whomever put that attitude in his head sure was.

It continued into college.

College Days

My experience in college was not as crazy as you hear about today. But the hateful left was there as well. There are a few moments that stick out in my mind as examples of what could be considered “hatred” by “the left” in college. I’ll stick to one for now.

I had just started school. This would probably have been barely a year after the exchange in high school. My first year in college and one of my first classes. A representative from a local New York organization came to speak with one of our classes.

This organization is relatively well known in New York and I won’t mention them by name. Primarily, they work towards social and environmental reform in and around New York State. The individual speaking (they may have been a student but I’m not sure), was pitching the organization and trying to get volunteers to come get involved. After telling us about all the things they were working on, I was interested. I mean, why not get involved, right? Maybe I could do some good.

The speaker said at the end of her talk that if we were interested to come see her and sign up.

“Unless you’re a Republican,” she said. “If so, then f**k you and we don’t want’cha.”

And just about everyone, including the professor, laughed.

Nothing To See Here?

It wasn’t the foul language. I’d heard plenty by then. I didn’t grow up sheltered. As a teenager, I was as foul-mouthed as they come. Still am, sometimes. But it was all of it. This person had been invited or at least allowed to come and speak to a Freshman college class. She cursed half the country and said “we don’t want you in our group.” The professor, leader of the class and a representative of the school, laughed and went right along with it. The hateful left strikes again.

Therefore, the message was clear. Republicans were not welcome at my school. If it wasn’t clear from that moment, it became clearer in the months and years ahead. I experienced or witnessed similar moments. Nothing was violent or traumatizing, mind you. But it was there and it was accepted.

If I had any Republican classmates, they didn’t out themselves. Classroom discussions about any social, government, or economic issue had to be given a left-leaning curve to it otherwise you weren’t taken seriously. No one voiced opposition. That the left-leaning perspective was the correct one was a foregone conclusion. Of course this is the right view to have. Anything else would just be ridiculous, if not evil. I, like many others, put my head down, did my work, and didn’t get involved.

This ridicule, condemnation, hatred, or spiteful feelings about the opposition were only coming, as far as I could see, from one side. The left. Republicans were the punchline to jokes. George W. Bush was literally Hitler (yes, it was said back then too), and anyone who was even slightly “on the right” was basically not welcomed in with open arms.

No, It Did Not Start With Trump

People like to speak about Trump as the cause of all this. That’s far too convenient. President Trump will not be remembered for being a great Statesman or an eloquent speaker. His rhetoric is charged, no doubt. However, as others have pointed out, Trump is not the cause. Trump is the effect. He is not the disease, but the symptom. Trump is not the beginning, and he may not be the end either.

The election of Trump is a response by Republicans for years of being demonized by their opponents.

Think aborting a baby is bad? You’re a misogynist who hates women. Want to own a gun? You support school shootings and love dead teenagers. Think there’s problems with welfare and it needs to be reformed? You hate poor people, you monster. Do you dare think that maybe the government running healthcare is a bad idea? Wow, now you hate sick cancer patients and want them to die. This is the hateful left.

Bubbling For Years

Years of this, fueled by fiery political rhetoric from the hateful left, and propped up by a corrupt and biased media which is essentially the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party (except for Fox News which is the same thing, just in the opposite direction), has led to this.

First, Republicans sent the good ol’ boy establishment GOP guy from Texas and he was called an illiterate moron who was somehow also literally Hitler and evil.

Then, Republicans sent the war hero whom the left has only recently decided they like again now that he’s deceased. He too was literally Hitler and according to Democrats and the media, probably senile and going to die in office. Then along came Mitt Romney. Perhaps the most morally decent person to seek the Presidency in the last several years. He too, was maligned as a rich misogynist with “binders full of women” who was going to bring back slavery.

Finally, Republicans said f**k it. This country is a china shop and we’re sending in the bull.

By The Way, I’m Not Even A Republican

I never felt like I was “raised to be a Republican.” It wasn’t a core part of my childhood. I certainly was not raised to hate my political opponents. Nor was I raised to think they were bad people. Certainly not evil.

I’m not even a Republican. When I turned 18 I registered to vote. My registration says “Independent.” It did then and it does now. Perhaps in part due to my upbringing I tend to side more with “the right” on issues, but I’m not a Republican and never have been.

So no, I’m not even a Republican. But based on my experienced with the hateful left as well as the behavior of the Democratic Party, I’m sure as hell not that either. I didn’t #walkaway from the Democratic Party. They never wanted me there to begin with.

1 2 3 4 →

Category Archives: Op Ed