Accusations don't take place of proof... some think they do, however

Person A says "He's a racist!!"

Person B says "I don't believe it"

Person A says "How dare you defend a racist!"

I say "So by saying that I don't believe an accusation that someone's a racist, according to you, then I am an advocate for it?"

Person B, if answering honestly, would say "Yes" because it's clear that's what they believe.

Now insert any other accusation in place of "racist" and that's what many of us face on a daily basis.

Conventional wisdom turns on itself

It’s better to be safe than sorry… BUT nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Winners never quit… BUT you should quit while you’re ahead.

A rolling stone gathers no moss… BUT stop and smell the roses.

The best things in life are free… BUT there’s no such thing as a free lunch.

Haste makes waste… BUT time waits for no man.

Absence makes the heart grow fonder… BUT out of sight, out of mind.

You’re never too old to learn… BUT you can’t teach an old dog new tricks.

Do unto others as you would have others do unto you… BUT nice guys finish last.

Seek and ye shall find… BUT curiosity killed the cat.

Whatever will be will be… BUT life is what you make it.

PG 12

The Discriminating Therapist by Michael D. Yapko

ISBN:  978-0-9910796-3-6

Everything is relative

If everything is relative, then what about the phrase "everything is relative"? Is that phrase true for some, but not others?

More than two genders and more than two unique genitalia?

It is well known that men and women, both different genders, have different genitalia. Some people think that there are more than two genders. If there were truly a 3rd, etc, gender, wouldn't they have their own unique genitalia? Or do they identify their pecker as some unique genitalia?

What I think about the Wikileaks and whether the files are legit or not

Wikileaks either themselves hacked the email accounts OR got sent emails from people who did the hacking of Podesta's email, Hillary's, etc. Either way, the documents are REAL. So saying that "well, they aren't legit" for whatever reason is a very poor spin and deflectionary tactic.

After all, since the democrats cheered when Wikileaks were leaking BUSH documents, that suggests they're legit from the Dems perspective.... yet when it's THEM that is hurt by the leaks, they say "well, it's not legit, cause...."

Also, Hillary, during the debate, said something about "Well, if you look at what I said in context...." which is a way of admitting that the leaks are LEGIT.

John McCain dumped Trump for hot mic comments, but has one of his own (VIDEO)

"But Donald Trump’s behavior this week, concluding with the disclosure of his demeaning comments about women and his boasts about sexual assaults, make it impossible to continue to offer even conditional support for his candidacy. (Wife) Cindy, with her strong background in human rights and respect for women, fully agrees with me in this." #JohnMcCain #DonaldTrump

Here is the article from which the quote above comes from:

http://www.newsweek.com/mccain-pulls-support-wont-vote-trump-507892

Here is the video that I'm talking about where McCain curses out a female: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCXOZpwT2ek

Anyone who fantasizes about sex shouldn't be offended by Trump's comments

If a woman isn't offended, but turned on by, the thought and action of a man either fondling her nether region or entering it, ahem... then why would she be offended when a man puts to words, in a private conversation (but then leaked), what she thinks in her head or lets happen to her in the bedroom? After all, her thoughts are private, so are his.... he is condemned if his comments are made public, but what if HER thoughts about being plowed or grabbed are somehow made public? If one read 50 Shades of Grey and anyone found out about it or knows that one is into that kind of book, then how can they conceivably complain about someone makes comments in the spirit of that book to someone else in a private conversation? If it's not lewd and crude when you fantasize about it, how is it lewd and crude when someone of the opposite sex puts it to words?

Now a woman that was offended by Trump's comments might think "Well, I don't dream of a man grabbing me by the pussy." This is semantics, because in sex, a lot of grabbing goes on, whether the pussy is the target or the breasts or the butt or the thighs. So let's say you don't imagine a man grabbing you by the pussy.... surely you'd imagine OTHER sexual acts done to you by him that involve grabbing?

Take me for example, if I ever got to be with the sexy as hell Ashley Graham, her nice rear end would DEFINITELY be grabbed by yours truly. And I wouldn't mind if she grabbed me by the crotch or anywhere else for that matter.

To see what Ashley Graham looks like, click here.

Trump's vulgar comments VS losing America forever (your choice)

What Hillary Clinton will do if President is far worse than what Trump said about women 11 years ago..... and it's too late to replace Trump. Trump is all we got. And we stand to lose America if Hillary is elected. Therefore the choice is Trump.

Trump's vulgar comments vs what's at stake in America

We only have two choices. The stakes are high. If Hillary wins, we lose our country. If Trump wins, we get our country back.

Do the vulgar comments made by Trump somehow erase this fact? How on earth could any sane person think that those facts are erased because of what Trump said about a decade ago?

Besides, Hillary left four Americans to die in Benghazi. She smeared the rape victims of her husband. 

TRUMP PENCE 2016!!!!!!

Your opinions and my opinions affect lives

The more an opinion affects others, the less it is "just a mere opinion". Whether good or bad, opinions often affect other people drastically depending on how they manifest themselves in all of our lives.

If it saves just one life, then it's worth it (Guns)

Some liberals say "If gun control saves just one life, it'll be worth it".

Consider this phrase: "A father with a gun can stop his daughter from being murdered by someone. If having a gun saves just one life, it'll be worth it..."

Liberal minority inner city ghetto communities

If, within your own liberal communities, under your own liberal leadership, your own liberal influences and liberal ideologies permeating your communities.... if with those things you STILL cannot get out of the crappy life you have into one that is better for your happiness, prosperity and safety..... how on earth can you continue to say that liberalism is a good thing?

For liberals who love socialism

If socialism is so great, how come you won't create cities from scratch based on it?

Reparations for slavery

This is a comment I left on a white person's post mentioning reparations for slavery:

"Even if you did own a slave, you'd only owe reparations to that individual. No other person of that individual's ethnicity would be owed anything from you."

If you don't like to debate, you need to read this

When the issue is national security, that's an issue that affects any one of us potentially and potentially people we know. Even if it's not us or people we know, such as with 9/11, it's regarding the lives of people who don't deserve the breach in national security that affects them. As such, warning others about the dangers of electing someone such as Hillary (who left four Americans to die in Benghazi) may lead to a debate, but consider what the alternatives are.

If you don't like debating others no matter the topic, you'll want to read this

If someone disagrees with you on what is and what is not a threat to someone (anyone), wouldn't you want to debate them to hopefully change their mind so they see the threat and can take proper action?

There is a diverse set of peoples in this country with diverse problems. So it's not just what hits home for you that you'd want to warn people about and inevitably start a debate over, it's that you care for people who have nothing to do with you that you'd want to warn about danger.

And when you warn people about danger they face, they may disagree with you and when they do, a debate starts. Sometimes debating goes hand in hand with caring.

Debating with people about threats to their freedom and safety

If you care for your freedom, you'll want a gov't that follows the Constitution.  If others vote for policies that infringe on the Constitution, they are advocating for policies that infringe on your freedom.  The natural thing to do when someone advocates for what infringes on your freedom is to debate them so there is a chance they'll advocate for safer policies for you.  If you care about you, you’ll debate others on the chance they might come around to advocating policies that are safer for you.

In other words, if there is a threat to your safety, and you can prevent it by getting others to see how their policies are dangerous, wouldn’t you try to fend off the threat by debating them?  I’m talking about the kind of threats that haven’t happened yet, but will happen somewhere down the line.

Politics is about freedom and safety, etc.  If you care about the diverse communities that face diverse issues all over this country, then if you see some kind of a threat that they may face, wouldn’t you want to warn them?  If you’re into warning them, then you’re someone who doesn’t mind debating them because it is for their own good.

I had to debate people all the time when I was trying to get out of an abusive relationship.  I hated doing it, but I had to, otherwise how was I going to get out of the hell I had been living in for so long?  No, this isn’t political, but the issue of getting people to see the light where they only see the dark is something common to causes that are both political and non political.

Trump's 2nd Amendment statement (regarding Hillary) in it's proper context

Said the Founders in the Declaration of Independence: "when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security" But if Trump says it regarding how to respond to a despotic Clinton administration, according to the liberals who never read the Declaration, somehow he's a bad man?

Powerful, hateful, murderous racists? A few thoughts on that

If we were as hateful and as powerful and as murder minded and as racist and in control of the key institutions of America as Democrats say…. how come there are still many communities out there with minorities still living in them? Wouldn’t people as described by Democrats be able to murder many, most, or all minorities and get away with it?

One more thing: We are said to be powerful. We are also said to use coded language to express our thoughts about minorities. Since when do powerful people use coded language to express their thoughts about any given topic?

Disagreeing with a lifestyle doesn't mean you want to oppress them

If a liberal thinks I want to oppress LGBT because I disagree with their lifestyle, that liberal is adding something to the mix that wasn't there. I merely disagree with their lifestyle. Since when is disagreeing with someone oppression of them? After all, liberals disagree with me on this yet according to them, they're not oppressing me, right? Right!

When non whites do it, it's "Social Justice" but when whites do it, it's "Stereotyping"!! Double standards!!

Many non whites have no problem whatsoever calling whites thieves, killers, rapists, corrupt, racists, haters, etc.  But WOE BE US if we do the same thing to them! When we do the same thing to them, we’re “stereotyping”.  We’re “bigoted” if we do the same thing to them.

But when they do it, it’s “social justice”.  Isn’t that a double standard?  And aren’t double standards in race relations hateful?  When whites have double standards, we’re called racist.

I think I’ll leave it at that.

Your culture influencing other cultures to be more like you is not a bad thing

I'm sorry, but when blacks complain about whites borrowing their culture (or in their words, "appropriating"), they don't seem to be realizing that we do so BECAUSE WE LIKE THEIR CULTURE. No, instead, they see it as theft. Since when is "I like your culture, so I'll copy aspects of it" theft and when is it bad to borrow what you like? Either way, it's not a bad thing for whites to be proudly influenced by blacks. This is further proof that there is less racism! Isn't less racism and it's proof a good thing?

All cultures have throughout history borrowed from other cultures that they've come into contact with. It is RACIST to say that whites can't borrow from blacks!

Cultural norms

Any culture that:

1.)  Beats women
2.)  Beats on minorities.
3.)  Beats on gays.

is a bad culture.

Islam is such a culture.

Now before you call me an islamophobe, consider that I'm clearly not sexist, I'm clearly not a bigot against minorities and I'm clearly not homophobic.  So shouldn't THAT carry some weight with you who are so ready to defend islam?

Liberals say it's ok to hate the following

You can hate whites.

You can hate men.

You can hate straight people.

You can hate Christians.


But you better not hate:

Non-whites.
Women.
LGBT.
Non-Christians.

That's a double standard.  When you use that double standard, you are borrowing the tactics of "bigoted" straight white Christian men, which makes YOU a bigot.

Minorities got screwed out of a good education

Fact:  People, whether minority or not, are not born well educated.  They have to work hard to obtain a good education.  (Exceptions are people like Einstein, who probably had an easier time compared to most of us).

Fact:  Minority kids more often than not get screwed when it comes to education in schools in their communities all the way until the time they graduate high school.

Fact:  People are not born automatically qualified for graduation from any level of schooling, from the grade school levels to the college/university/graduate school levels.

Fact:  To get hired by a high paying job, you have to get a good education as qualification.

Fact:  People are not born automatically qualified for a high paying job.

Fact:  It’s not the employers fault that most of you got a lousy education which in turn screwed you out of being qualified for a high paying job.

You needed a good education from the start, didn’t get one, you apply for a job that requires one but blame the employer’s “racism” that you didn’t get the job?  It's not because of racism, it's because of your lack of education!  Someone other than your employer is to blame!