America has put Trump into the Oval Office. It’s now on us to hold Trump accountable, and keep abreast of what he says and does. We owe it to America and our posterity to do our part as engaged and informed citizens.
This post is an effort to do so. If Trump makes a campaign promise, then reneges on it, that’s something the people of America deserve to know. Continue reading →
Tonight, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton will face off in the final official presidential debate of the 2016 election.
This debate could prove critical for Trump and Clinton, but even more is at stake for the entire nation. A major misstep by Clinton in this debate could dramatically erode her gains from the last few weeks, whilst a major blunder by Trump could seal Clinton’s victory in November.
I will be live-blogging my reactions to the debate on this post, starting at 9pm EST (6pm PST).
The debate itself is free to watch – a live stream provided by YouTube and NBC is embedded below for your convenience.
Header photo originally by ABC News. Used under the fair use doctrine for nonprofit educational purposes.
Liberals love to claim the label of the ‘Pro-Choice Party.’
Using the word ‘choice’ to refer to abortion makes them feel nice, warm, and fuzzy. It erases the guilt of supporting organized mass murder for profit from their conscience, and instead replaces it with the happy feeling of doing something good by supporting a woman’s so-called ‘right to choose.’
The only problem with this is that liberals are only the ‘party of choice’ when that choice adheres to their preconceived agendas. Specifically, liberals only support ‘choice’ when it comes to a woman’s decision to abort (read kill) an unborn child. Continue reading →
“Until the courts put a stop to it, public debate over same-sex marriage displayed American democracy at its best. Individuals on both sides of the issue passionately, but respectfully, attempted to persuade their fellow citizens to accept their views. Americans considered the arguments and put the question to a vote. The electorates of 11 States, either directly or through their representatives, chose to expand the traditional definition of marriage. Many more decided not to. Win or lose, advocates for both sides continued pressing their cases, secure in the knowledge that an electoral loss can be negated by a later electoral win. That is exactly how our system of government is supposed to work.”